forum.nofna.com

Main => NofNA => Topic started by: Strokend on March 05, 2008, 02:42:08 AM



Title: Questions about the world
Post by: Strokend on March 05, 2008, 02:42:08 AM
I've had some questions about the world of NofNA come to mind, so I decided to make this thread for such questions to be asked. (Yes, I realize I'm making many threads here, but nobody else is, so, hey, might as well be me)

A thread for questions on characters can be found here (http://forum.nofna.com/index.php/topic,8.0.html).

The glossary (http://forum.nofna.com/index.php/topic,39.0.html) is up in the forums, courtesy of Zach himself.

For those wondering, and that haven't looked into the info area, the world takes place on one single continent, like Pangaea of Earth.

I've asked about the planet's name, here (http://forum.nofna.com/index.php/topic,11.msg54.html#msg54).

Stella brought up a question about themes in the styles, here (http://forum.nofna.com/index.php/topic,11.msg55.html#msg55).

A question by Deaddancecrow, - who I'll probably refer to as "DDC" - right here (http://forum.nofna.com/index.php/topic,11.msg78.html#msg78), about the art of styles. A small question, but a question nonetheless.

Stella returns with another question, located here (http://forum.nofna.com/index.php/topic,11.msg85.html#msg85), on the dietary needs of animals. Honestly, I think this is a good question. Also, a question about water mammals (http://forum.nofna.com/index.php/topic,11.msg93.html#msg93) and their role in society.

I asked about animals' paws in the world (http://forum.nofna.com/index.php/topic,11.msg99.html#msg99) of NofNA.

Dareon came up with a point about evolution with a different landmass, and the influence of humans in this post (http://forum.nofna.com/index.php/topic,11.msg151.html#msg151).

An anonymous person asked about the origin of domestic cats, here (http://quickforum.nofna.com/g.pl/1207120998/l50), in the quickforums.

Check out (http://forum.nofna.com/index.php/topic,11.msg242.html#msg242) Kaiyodei's questions about synesthesa and about hybrids (http://forum.nofna.com/index.php/topic,11.msg253.html#msg253)! Even some questions about personalities and such (http://forum.nofna.com/index.php/topic,11.msg353.html#msg353).

Mew breaks Kai's question streak with questions on college stuff (http://forum.nofna.com/index.php/topic,11.msg371.html#msg371).

Hey! I'm back with a few more questions on halos (http://forum.nofna.com/index.php/topic,11.msg382.html#msg382) and beliefs (http://forum.nofna.com/index.php/topic,11.msg391.html#msg391)! I even furthered my questions on halos (http://forum.nofna.com/index.php/topic,11.msg425.html#msg425).

Kai asked about the extended life span (http://forum.nofna.com/index.php/topic,11.msg429.html#msg429) of animals in NofNA and the intelligence boost (http://forum.nofna.com/index.php/topic,11.msg431.html#msg431) from the halo. Furthering his questions, he asks about regional cultures (http://forum.nofna.com/index.php/topic,11.msg434.html#msg434)

I asked about spoken and written languages (http://forum.nofna.com/index.php/topic,11.msg438.html#msg438).

Kai asked a series of questions here (http://forum.nofna.com/index.php/topic,11.msg445.html#msg445), but I'm too lazy to list each and every individual one.

CentrauGuardian asked about humans and halo brains (http://forum.nofna.com/index.php/topic,11.msg482.html#msg482).

Kai asked about the existance of animals extinct to our world (http://forum.nofna.com/index.php/topic,11.msg505.html#msg505).

After a long bit of offered information, I actually asked a question about the discard of dead bodies (http://forum.nofna.com/index.php/topic,11.msg590.html#msg590) of animals.

Kai asked a series of questions here (http://forum.nofna.com/index.php/topic,11.msg595.html#msg595).

I further asked about carnivore's eating/diet (http://forum.nofna.com/index.php/topic,11.msg598.html#msg598).

Sabs asked quite a bit of questions, here (http://forum.nofna.com/index.php/topic,11.msg601.html#msg601).

Arc asked about human items (http://forum.nofna.com/index.php/topic,11.msg608.html#msg608) in the world of NofNA.

Random asked about the current evolutionary stage of humans (http://forum.nofna.com/index.php/topic,11.msg609.html#msg609), or something like that.

I asked about animal's use of the word "Anthropology." (http://forum.nofna.com/index.php/topic,11.msg663.html#msg663)

Kai asked about psychological problems (http://forum.nofna.com/index.php/topic,11.msg664.html#msg664) existing among animals.

I asked about the existance of hermaphrodites and morphodites (http://forum.nofna.com/index.php/topic,11.msg668.html#msg668) in the world of NofNA.

Kai asked about the comparison of NofNA Wilds to Earth wilds (http://forum.nofna.com/index.php/topic,11.msg670.html#msg670).

Stella breaks the chain between Kai and myself with a question on hybrids (http://forum.nofna.com/index.php/topic,11.msg679.html#msg679).

Kai asks about breeding taboos (http://forum.nofna.com/index.php/topic,11.msg686.html#msg686), or something.

Devilchun asked about some stuff, here (http://forum.nofna.com/index.php/topic,11.msg737.html#msg737).

Natoon asked some more stuff here (http://forum.nofna.com/index.php/topic,11.msg759.html#msg759).


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Strokend on March 05, 2008, 02:42:50 AM
Here's a question: Is the world Earth, or a different planet altogether?


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Stella on March 05, 2008, 05:27:07 AM
Don't apologize for threads, that's waht a forum is for!

As for whether it's Earth or not... the info section refers to the planet as Earth but says it's in a different dimense.  Whether the animals refer to the planet as earth, however, I do not know.

I have a question about styles.  I've noticed something between a coincidence and a trend.  Most of Quintet's styles are marine based (Seal, crab, etc.).  Rule's styles have been non-animal styled (Mucous, Wysteria) and a lot of Meander's styles were bug themed (Slug, centipede, spider).  Is this something that generally happens at the college?  I see it as a kind of major.  Like Quintet majors in marine styles or soemthing XD I guess it kind of makes sense to me...


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Zachary Braun on March 05, 2008, 12:56:46 PM
Stella's correct; this is merely a different realization of Earth. It's still the same third planet from the sun, just under different circumstances. Stella, I'm not sure that the animals even know what a planet is at this point in their history.

Themes in the styles are not mandated by the college, at least I don't think so, but they are primarily chosen by the animal. Much like college classes. It is easier to profess in one theme than it is to learn about a variety of disparate things and then all integrate them under the same schema. Or it may simply be a preference each animal shows. Quintet's theme was marine life indeed. Meander was "snakes, snails, and puppy dogs' tails". But I didn't have a concrete idea about Rule and Polarizing's studies. It's possible that they came from an era where specialization was not as popular or intuitive.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Deaddancecrow on March 18, 2008, 11:11:10 PM
Even if you had uploaded the glossary (which is btw very hard to find) http://www.nofna.com/glossary.html
I'm still not getting every stile and its purpose D:
am I stupid?


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Zachary Braun on March 19, 2008, 12:44:57 AM
You're not stupid! I simply hadn't intended for the glossary to hold style information. It was only meant to house cultural and technical terms and parlance--key items that might help in understanding the story.

Styles are art, and their impressions are meant to be discerned by the reader. (An artistic process in and of itself.)


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Stella on March 22, 2008, 09:51:07 PM
'Nother question!

I was just thinking about the carnivorous animals of the comic.  If the animal society views the consumption of another animal as cannibalism or a taboo then what do the carnivores eat?  Along with speech did they evolve a new kind of digestive system?  We know that eating bugs is perfectly acceptable within this society but surely bugs wouldn't be able to provide adequate sustenance for something like a lion.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Zachary Braun on March 23, 2008, 08:40:39 AM
I agree about the inadequacy of insects alone to nourish carnivores. What allowed animals in this world to make the jump is the enforced ability to forage. We may see increased consumption of mushrooms, roots, and leafy plants here. It is not well known, but animals in our world on the verge of desperation do tend to shift their eating habits. Many carnivores will eat whatever is available, i.e. foxes, wolves, and bears foraging in the rubbish bin. In NofNA, larger carnivores may have died out or been purposefully expelled from civilized areas. (Those committed to the wild still eat meat, even though they are sentient.)

Because they seem so different, fish may also be consumed... if they can be caught! (But not in the east, where they are regarded as too similar.) There may also be a greater number of insects, in terms of variety and quantity.

They'd have to manage somehow... or else they'd starve! It's quite possible that hunger alone was a driving force for some animals to choose to stay with the wild society.

Typing the above paragraph makes me realize that a lot of prey animals probably moved to civilized society in order to seek asylum from the food chain.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Strokend on March 23, 2008, 10:23:06 PM
I was thinking of asking about eating fish until I saw that part in your post. There are plants that hold the nutrients of certain meats, and to satisfy meats, other than fish, I'd assume large bugs/insects, such as a fat millipede (those things get fat!), satisfy the need for large amounts of meat. I also assume that this was the reason a lot of the animals at the auction cave (heh, auction-cave :D) were surprised in a happy way when Rule & Polarizing commented on Vacuous Coyotes being legal meat?


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Stella on March 24, 2008, 03:50:38 AM
I'd been wondering about how the fish participated in society with the constrait of having to be in water at all times.  Guess they have their own society.  This of course brings up the question of marine mammals.  Seals probably don't have a problem since aren't water bound but what about whales and other cetaceans?  In one of the gallery pictures there is a dolphin so I'm assuming they aren't subject to the same views of inequality.

I need to start writing my questions down because i have so many and they come at the most inopportune moments, by the time I get back to the computer I've forgotten them!


Title: hands/paws
Post by: Strokend on March 26, 2008, 06:43:01 PM
At certain points in the comic, the animals' paws look similar to a primate's hand. Did they actually develope frontal-paw-hands, still have paws, or what?


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Zachary Braun on March 27, 2008, 03:07:03 AM
I'm thinking it's a little half-and-half, but not overly so. Canids, felines, and other dedicated quadrupeds have normal paws and have trouble doing anything that would require hands like ours. Small rodents and primates, and primate-like animals (like the kinkajous), have more human-like hands, so they can get more "civilized" things done.

Hands are valuable in this society, so it's a possibility that mutations that made paws more like hands were desirable and the genetic holder was able to easily secure a mate and carry down such genes to the next generation. But it's a little too soon for that kind of evolution. If you've seen hand-like paws on a dedicated quadruped, I think it's more my bad technique than intention.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Dareon on March 31, 2008, 07:35:42 AM
One thing I wonder about is the examples of divergent evolution on this Earth.  For instance, most of the Australian mammals (at the very least) evolved differently because their landmass broke off from the main one quite early in the world's formation.  While the potential for evolution of odd animals in, say, mountain-bound inaccessible valleys is still there, I do wonder about the effect the conglomerated Gondwanaland-esque supercontinent has had on evolution.

Related is the status of humans on this Earth.  We know they've proceeded more or less in parallel with our Earth, and the background of the gallery piece "Two Moons" shows a city with what looks like a rocket gantry.  I suppose I'm wondering if they'll be making appearances later, even as background for, say, a story set in a city's alleyways.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Zachary Braun on March 31, 2008, 10:28:58 AM
This is definitely true. In our world, if the continents had been formed differently, I think every species on the planet would have the potential to look different, all having adapted to different surroundings and different other species.

I do think I fudge NofNA a little as it is. One possible explanation, however, is the stand-in of tall mountain ranges which divided access to landmasses, especially where the continents collided with each other in the past (as in our Himalayas, where India slammed upwards into south asia). There may still be several large inland seas (I think the example at the top of page 16 may be one). We may also see some enormous cliff ranges later on. I'm getting excited imagining all the weird new, extreme wonders of the world, like perhaps a giant crater or a mountain range rivalling Olympus Mons.

Humans are indeed still the dominant force on this planet. We haven't seen any yet, just the barest influences of them (as in the picture you cite). Kind of like how animals are in the background of our world, acting invisible, if we don't think about them.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Kaiyodei on April 07, 2008, 11:36:49 PM
I accidenrly made a topic about synesthesia in the nofna word's animals. if they have elaborated halo brains then i figure there are 'cases' of such, seeing how they are civilized and a show I watched said that some slight synisetiesa could of helped humans because of metaphores being a form of it, such as words being attributed to things and the likes and language.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Zachary Braun on April 08, 2008, 12:37:16 AM
Since NofNA was originally about psychopathology, synesthesia and other pathologies are certainly not out of the question for any given animal. If anyone is making a character with such a trait, put it under the "traits" section in the character sheet.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Kaiyodei on April 08, 2008, 01:24:48 AM
what about hybreds? would posslbe hybreeds occure in your world Zack? like how apparently polar and grizzlie bears are crossbredding? and other species can cross breed?


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Zachary Braun on April 08, 2008, 08:15:50 PM
None moreso than in our world. The chromosomal disparities are supposed to be largely the same. In addition, animal society isn't secure enough to allow for acceptance of interracial breeding--like ours was for a while. Later on we may see a more accepted view of different species from the same genus allowing themselves to fall in love, but crossbreeding is not really possible if the genetics don't allow for it.

I would've though you'd like to keep hybrids the domain of your story?


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Kaiyodei on April 09, 2008, 12:21:00 AM
oh yeh i don't want to get rid of the neofauna i just was wondering about closely related crossbreeds like wolf-coyote


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Kaiyodei on April 17, 2008, 02:01:11 AM
whould multiple personalities exist in the NOFNA world?
what about zelot animals? or is their sociocity and civilazation more than civilized ours? would there be animals with a 'my way or nothing' way of wanting to run things and take over? dictators?


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Strokend on April 17, 2008, 02:29:09 AM
They're not as civilized as ours; it seems they're less so. I don't know about multiple personalities, but I'm sure there are those who have the "my way or nothing" or "my way or die" attitude.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Zachary Braun on April 17, 2008, 05:34:31 AM
I think anything can happen this early in the story, with this kind of unstable society.

There are probably instances of multiple personalities, if you mean Disassociative Identity Disorder. (I have a story I'd like to do with that.)


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Mew on April 17, 2008, 10:35:49 PM
QUESTION BARRAGE TIME! :D lol sorry.

I was wondering about colleges. Where are they held? Do they have classes, what is the schedule? How are they like compared to our schools/colleges?
And what decides who are teachers? What subjects are taught, what, say, graduate courses are there?
*needles for information* What would a normal animal do to enroll in the college?


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Zachary Braun on April 18, 2008, 04:25:25 AM
The answers to all of these questions are variable. I'd assume that because animals lack a sophisticated communications network, colleges would be set up much the same as wushu schools were in the far east many centuries ago. Every school had its own style (In this case, styles) and mode of operation. We may see all sorts of practices across the globe as the concept of colleges spreads with time across the animal kingdom, and as new style technology is developed.

I never think too hard about it unless it's necessary. There's a lot of variety in this world. Try to imagine how you would run an institute that would teach the pride of civilized conduct through sharing each others' resources, while at the same time investigating the natural world, like an art school.

The one thing I can honestly say I never even considered are graduate courses. I thought they didn't exist. Feel free to make me wrong!


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Strokend on April 19, 2008, 01:37:17 AM
I always thought the metanoia was the graduation course...

Hey! Here's a big, good 'un!
I plan on making another char (Yeh, I make lots of chars usually), this one a(n?) HIOT agent (Speaking of, is it pronounced he-ought, or Ehch-eye-oh-tea?). I know they don't know much about halos at the current time, but I was wondering... Are halos fitted to one specific animal? Or, can they be transfered/traded? If they are transfered, does it give the recipent the functions the halo was able to function for the previous owner, any functions the animal is capable of (even if not of the original owner), or does the conscience exist within the halo, and so it's like that person simply acquires a different body?


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Zachary Braun on April 19, 2008, 03:35:53 AM
That would be a cool idea. I hadn't even considered it. There might be some kind of horrible shock in the coupling process that I can imagine, where the halos, connecting to the corporeal neural circuitry, cannot connect. But if you can make it work, I'd say it's fair game.

I pronounce HIOT "hee-ought", but you may pronounce it how you like. Spelling out the acronym might emphasize its newness or the importance of each letter.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Strokend on April 20, 2008, 05:28:24 AM
I always pronounce it as he-ought (or hee-ought as you type it), but wanted to make sure I wasn't wrong. It makes sense, I suppose, that it can work either way. Heh, the char'll be experimenting with dying folk who volunteer, of course. Refuses to work on those who don't volunteer or those who aren't dying (even if they DO volunteer) due to moral reasons. Good to know that things will be possible to research. Otherwise it'd've been given up :P

Hmm, here's another question: Do the animals in the world of NofNA believe/have ideas about spirits or spiritual contact? Or do they simply see it as when an animal dies, they become the original nature again?


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Zachary Braun on April 20, 2008, 06:01:04 AM
I had no plans to introduce spirits or anything resembling spirits into NofNA. (I personally consider Rule's meeting with the wolf underwater to be his interpretation of a sense hallucination from his dying brain.)

But if you can find a way to make spirits work in a world where "nature" is considered the beginning and the end, you should give it a shot!


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Kaiyodei on April 20, 2008, 01:44:43 PM
That would be a cool idea. I hadn't even considered it. There might be some kind of horrible shock in the coupling process that I can imagine, where the halos, connecting to the corporeal neural circuitry, cannot connect. But if you can make it work, I'd say it's fair game.

I pronounce HIOT "hee-ought", but you may pronounce it how you like. Spelling out the acronym might emphasize its newness or the importance of each letter.

oh my brain was saying hoy-oat or something h-oat.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Strokend on April 26, 2008, 05:30:24 PM
What happens to the halo upon death? It's not part of nature, I think, but it exists nonetheless...


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Zachary Braun on April 26, 2008, 08:40:04 PM
To tell you the truth, I'm not sure. The impression I got from myself is that it "goes away".


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Kaiyodei on April 27, 2008, 02:49:49 PM
Zack, you said these animals live spans are a bit longer than our normal animals, is that because of Halo-brainedness or soicoity? also how much are they expanded, expanded like our wild animals or the same lengh of a captive animal in our real world?

shrews are very short lived, and some animals have 4 year life spans if wild, but in a zoo could live to 10.
i mean give their natural motablims.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Zachary Braun on April 27, 2008, 03:01:22 PM
Hi Col!

I think it may be because of the halo brain. In our wilderness, animals get run over, they get disease, they get into fights with one another, some starve, some die of exposure. Some get trapped or even shot. I think that the halo brain allows them to circumvent a lot of these problems with intelligence, or at least, more deliberation than they would normally apply to a problem. Foxes wouldn't blither into traps, wolves wouldn't take as much livestock, knowing that it means they could get shot. (But, they still need to eat. It's a delicate balance.)

This is why my estimate of "50-75% longer" is just that, an estimate. There may be something having to do with the genetics, like how healthier animals aren't getting removed from the gene pool by weird occurrences like human intervention any longer. Or other benign mutations.

It's true that shrews don't live as long. Perhaps they develop differently from other animals as they grow up. Each animal would have its own rate of development, the same way sexual maturity varies widely across the animal kingdom.

Humans have a very delayed sexual maturity due to the complexity of our society--we need something like 13 years before we're even genetically confident enough to try to get a mate.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Kaiyodei on April 29, 2008, 01:16:09 AM
what about intellegances? if a parrot is alredy smarter than an iguana would a parrot with a halo brain exceed the lizard with a halo brain in higher abstract thinking?

back to the age thing, if a tortiose here can live 100 years, how long to halo-brained tortiose live(orcas i think can live to 80, and some parrots 70+)

uh, i guess we'll see animal cultures involving areas of life and death and births, we see they alredy have personal naming ceremonies.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Zachary Braun on April 29, 2008, 06:23:17 PM
I imagine that the halo brain is a bit of an equalizer. But the animal would still be limited by its body's inherent senses. This might shape their world and culture. For example, the bird brain is able to process sound at a rate triple that of the human brain. This might play off of their attitudes or some part of their discourse, in some situation.

I think beyond a certain point, the halo brain stops granting its longevity benefit. The tortoise you cite already lives a long time, so it wouldn't appear to benefit from being any smarter. It must live a sedate life to reach such ages.

The thing to keep in mind is that animals are being "tamed" by themselves. This is, in large part, what I think increases their lifespans.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Kaiyodei on April 30, 2008, 01:02:33 PM
yeh seems reasionable. and sence they don't eat eachother (the vampire bats?) it helps with mortality rate, plus no illnesses from such (e-coli and the likes)

how far does their cultures go? is it region speficic, species spefific? they have law and a school, did i ask alredy i forgot.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Zachary Braun on April 30, 2008, 07:25:11 PM
Because they still have a primitive communications network (I don't think there's even anything semblant of a telephone yet), I'd say that culture is still regional. And because certain species might not hang out with each other, due to old prejudices or simply bodily differences, I think there may be a biological division in these cultures as well.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Strokend on April 30, 2008, 11:04:00 PM
I think bird's would be the main form of long-distance communication... Here's a question: Is "Common" the same throughout the world, or are there regions with their own 'common?' And what about written language?


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Zachary Braun on May 01, 2008, 02:50:37 AM
When you ask this question, I am reminded of missionaries who spread far and wide, teaching reading and writing in the name of religious practice. I think the same thing has probably happened here. "Common" is the people's language, but I can definitely expect to see any number of creoles to pop up. It was created with the same purpose in mind as the colleges: to help animals share with one another. Purity would be in its blood.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Kaiyodei on May 02, 2008, 10:33:22 PM
are there cannibles in the nofna world?
what of carrion birds?
crocks that are civilized ate fish and bugs?
would non-'bug' blood suckers have special 'pacts' and special animals vie for sacrifical jobs to be a 'host donar"?


what of status postions? bear kings and outlaw hawks?

are all the animals in your nofna universe as are now?  an example would be are thylicines and sea minks extinct in this universe. current human extinctions of species. are they the same here?

what about 'cryptids'? is genisis the man-ape a sasquash or australiophitihus(bad spelling)?
========

with a halo brain there is a sence of self, even without hands how would one of these animals do in a 'spot' test? with a sence of self would something with an ablity try to decorate themself? in the role play they use baskets,but those are nessisities and tools.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Zachary Braun on May 03, 2008, 01:07:13 AM
NofNA is supposed to be "open content", which means what I say doesn't necessarily go. That's why I am always giving vague answers. Any of the things you mention may be or not be. I don't consider the world as something iron others have to conform to in order to play in. I am just like you: I'm using it like a tool in order to tell certain stories. Story is the heart of NofNA, and because of this, it has the power to change any of those things.

But I'm REALLY impressed you mentioned the "spot" test. For anyone else reading, this is where a spot is placed on the animal with a dab of paint. The animal is then led to a mirror and must somehow acknowledge that the image in the mirror is the animal's self. They should then touch the spot, because it is a foreign object.

The problem with this test is that it assumes that an animal would 1. automatically know what it would look like, and 2. be able to recognize the spot as foreign to its own makeup. 3. It would also have to have the desire to remove the spot.

That being said, I'm not sure NofNA animals would pass a spot test. I say this, because I think that if I were an animal having grown up outside human culture, I wouldn't know what this test means, or even what a "spot" means. Is it something to be removed? If it's on my face, is it supposed to be there? If I'm a quadruped, I've spent all my life having stuff on my face and my body that I can't reach. Why should I bother with that "spot"? It seems like more of a buddhist attitude. But the bottom line is, I don't know. It would be up to the animal--to you.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Kaiyodei on May 04, 2008, 01:17:00 AM
yhe because dogs and cats won't have much way to touch their forhead like primates or elephants.
or would they assume the animal they see is another and wonder "hay you have stuff on your face you know?" or "wow i never saw markings like that!"

I forget, was it true human children only can pass this at a certain age? that and the mirror text?


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Zachary Braun on May 05, 2008, 03:36:33 AM
In all honesty, I am unfamiliar with those aspects of the spot test. I've only heard about it from when an elephant was reputed to have passed it. They may have been mentioned, but I don't remember if they were.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: CentrauGuardian on May 13, 2008, 09:05:49 PM
Now I'm a little curious; I'm not sure if it's been mentioned anywhere or been asked before but I'll ask anyway.

In terms of humans and the halo brain, assuming that the humans are at the current real life level of intelligence (referring to the shuttle gantry mentioned earlier) can humans develop the halo brain? Is there a limit to the intelligence necessary or to how much intelligence can be gained from the halo brain? Could the halo brain be an explanation as to why humans are at their current level of intelligence?


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Strokend on May 13, 2008, 10:06:47 PM
It is suspected that humans invented the Halo brain for the animals. Humans are unable to use a halo brain because they already are intelligent, capable of complex thoughts; They can even go up to (maybe even further than) 90% use at one time safely. I believe that is the case, that is. It may have been mentioned somewhere, I forget.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Kaiyodei on May 20, 2008, 06:23:31 PM
It is suspected that humans invented the Halo brain for the animals. Humans are unable to use a halo brain because they already are intelligent, capable of complex thoughts; They can even go up to (maybe even further than) 90% use at one time safely. I believe that is the case, that is. It may have been mentioned somewhere, I forget.


hh.. that idea could help my talking animacomic.

anway Zack. does the NOFNA world have animales we recently extincted here? like tazzy tigers and sea minks, passanger pidgons and the dodo?


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Zachary Braun on May 21, 2008, 02:22:02 AM
It may. If new species can exist, old ones could have survived exceptional circumstances, such as man wiping out the dodo because it was too tame to have enough fear to run away. (But for this reason, I'm not sure the dodo could make it. Maybe the thylacine, being the "tasmanian tiger", could.)


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Kaiyodei on May 21, 2008, 02:43:28 AM
i guess placid animals couldn't make it, given there isn't the same isolations, unless dodos arrived in civlized sociotys. seeing how its illegal to eat eachother.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Strokend on May 21, 2008, 04:37:43 AM
Dodo's are foolish (NOT brave); they don't step down from anything. Would this mean they'd stay wild and get eaten, or they'd join society to show that they're capable of helping it in ways that nobody else could? They'd probably end up breaking several laws if they did that, though. I'm sure they'd be transfered to a region where civilized groups can live and still not have to follow certain laws in place elsewhere.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Kaiyodei on May 21, 2008, 04:31:37 PM
Dodo's are foolish (NOT brave); they don't step down from anything. Would this mean they'd stay wild and get eaten, or they'd join society to show that they're capable of helping it in ways that nobody else could? They'd probably end up breaking several laws if they did that, though. I'm sure they'd be transfered to a region where civilized groups can live and still not have to follow certain laws in place elsewhere.

hahaha that would be amuzing, a gang of bumbling roving dodos in a talking-animal comic/cartoon.
trouble making lawbreaker punks.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: natoon on June 11, 2008, 11:28:29 PM
Zach - in response to a question about carnivores eating vegetarian/insectivore fare:
[It is not well known, but animals in our world on the verge of desperation do tend to shift their eating habits. Many carnivores will eat whatever is available, i.e. foxes, wolves, and bears foraging in the rubbish bin].

  I beg to differ.  There are lots of different kinds of carnivores, and they don't all have the same digesting equipment.  Canids and bears, for instance, have the ability to take advantage of plant food because they possess a gut more like an omnivore ( in fact, bears are more omnivore than carnivore). That means they have a longer gastroinestinal system that produces the neccesary chemisals to derive the nutrients the animal needs. Even so, dogs and other "mostly meat" non-obligate carnivores would do poorly on an all vegetarian diet - malnutrition and high pup mortality would probably be a result. Obligate carnivores, such as felines, aren't able to get the nutrients they need to survive from plants. They need taurine, for example, a nutrient derived from meat that omnivores and herbivores make within their bodies but felines don't. (yeah, cats eat grass -but they don't get nutritive benefit from it - for that they need the "pre-digested " stomach contents of their prey). That's just one example; there are lots others.
  O.K., were talking subsistance here, not ideal nutrition in the NOFNA world, but I think many carnivores couldn't put on a show like Meander, Quintet, and Rule did, all carnivores, (lucky Polarizing, nobody will begrudge him his ants!) without being in a high quality physiological state, which is impossible without appropriate nutrition.
  So,?  Strokend commented that there are plants that have all the nutrition in meat, and that might be true, but true only for us humans, not for most carnivores.
 


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Zachary Braun on June 12, 2008, 12:44:02 AM
That's good research! Although I was under the impression that animals will make do with as much as they can. Those that could not process enough food while staying in this animal society must have already died out, or defected into the wild. It's evolution in action.

The animals' top physical shape was a direct result of what must have been some healthy eating habits--"healthy" being a relative term here.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: natoon on June 12, 2008, 05:29:15 AM
  Well, the peasants in Russia survived by eating grass. They didn't thrive on it, though. They were starving, and very weak.  Many died anyway. And we are omnivores - although grass is one of the hardest things there is to digest (cows have a very highly evolved digestive system).
  I think black market meat would have "evolved" into this society, or maybe the NofNA version of "sky burial" ritual where the carnivores eat the dead, sooner than individuals evolving a radically different gastrointestinal system, given that intellegence and communication made such a quantum leap forward.  They could think and adapt  their behavior around this problem a lot faster than waiting for evolution. Just like we do --
  And as your finely accurate drawing details for us, their teeth haven't changed much at all.  Teeth are the beginning of digestion, and one needs grinding teeth to properly digest plant material. Felines don't have any - all their teeth are for grasping and cutting meat.  Canids have just four modified shearing teeth that they can kind of chew with - well developed teeth, but nowhere near the impressive, often continuously growing array you'd find in a true herbavore's mouth.
  So, if carnivores are going through incredibly rapid massive evolutionary changes to their gastrointestinal systems, it would make sense that these changes would include grinding teeth and bigger guts to acommodate the longer intestines needed, as well as more nimble digits for collecting food, or radical body changes to captalize on certain food sources. If evolution is happening that fast, anything goes. Outsides change a lot easier, evolutionarily, than insides.
  But if you do that, you lose much of that carnivore "coolness" -- the sharp teeth, the peircing eyes, the lythe bodies all evolved over millions of years for killing supper.  What to do?
  I say let carnivores be carnivores.  Let everybody be what theyare. And let this emerging society work it all out.
  Now doesn't that sound like fun?
   
 


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Strokend on June 12, 2008, 07:25:02 AM
Uh, the society has emerged enough as is to sort most of that out already... Keep in mind, it's been a long time that they've had these societies (I think), so they have naturally evolved to be able to survive on plants. And, also, keep in mind: Millipedes are HUGE. A nummy treat, eh? In a world where they're becoming a major prey, they grow harder 'skin' (or is it an exo-skeleton?) that only the sharp- or strong-jawed carnivores can still break through. And there are probably other large insects. Perhaps Fly-Traps have grown larger than the Venus Fly-Traps (Jupiter Fly-Traps, anybody?); they consume insects, of which some eat meat, some eat decaying stuff, some eat 'exported objects,' and some eat plants. Heck, large variety of nutrients there. And what about mosquitoes? They suck the nutrients out that the blood is carrying; animals eat 'em, get those nutrients.

Here's a question: What DO the animals do with the bodies of the dead?


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Zachary Braun on June 12, 2008, 09:32:20 AM
In regard to the dead bodies, I think that there is still a lot of the old tradition involved in dealing with them. What I was picturing is that dead bodies are simply left out in the open to rot, somewhere where the smell wouldn't be too pungent. At this point the insects and fungus consume it. If it's practical to do, the body may be thrown over a cliff, in what I imagined to be an animal version of cremation.

Natoon, you make a strong case for the societal concentration of healthy carnivores where there's more legal meat to be had (fish and bugs, and perhaps a little something that they can sneak, like a dead body. It would be like smoking or some other furtive activity: hard to quit, but trying the best they can in secret.) As far as carnivores may have come, I don't think they have evolved enough to eat grass, and develop things like grinding teeth and more importantly, a chewing jaw. I know that maned wolves have a diet that consists mostly of fruit, so Meander's cool. Quintet may have it tougher.

The subject of digestion also makes it clear that the enzymes produced by the body would have had to have changed a little if the teeth couldn't break "alternative food" down. Maybe it can be approximated. For example, fungus gardens may be closer to meat than a straight plant. Unavailable in dry regions, we simply wouldn't see any society mushrooming up around there (pun intended!).

Or, the animals may have noticed this and now take the time to chew their food as best they can, knowing that it aids in digestion. Even without a chewing jaw, I can imagine Quintet begrudgingly chewing many times on a spider or one of those cherimoyas, maybe even something weird, like rotten wood. (I've heard of gorillas eating rotten wood in order to obtain sodium.)

But beyond that, I don't know what to say! It's a deep subject.

Edit: I just thought of a gross solution to this problem: Cud vitamins. (Possibly refined further by herbalists)


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Kaiyodei on June 12, 2008, 03:35:42 PM
i was wondering that too for a long time, lucky the poster broght it up. those "super carnivores" they used the real terms.

caniforms, bears, skunks, canids, badgers can eat anything, but cats, belonging to canavoria aren't sutied to  plant matter, nore are hawks.

I was wondering too before about animals like vultures, or if some meat eater's had a job of eating the dead, not the disese ridden maybe but just dead guys.

I'm just confused because you(Zack) said large carnavores wouldn't do well, but in the comic I swear in some pannals i saw a lion and tiger
http://www.nofna.com/arcs/50/21.png
http://www.nofna.com/arcs/50/27.png
thats to big for a bobcat.

so that lion lives off of bugs and fish?

what do the NOFNA animals do with bad criminals, if they have a death penlity what happens?
they just kill them? wold there be enough crimminals to feed lions and such?
or do they eat wilds and would wilds try to eat the civlized? a dingo ate a dingo's baby?
would the large snakes fare well off of bugs? the'd need to eat more.
do amphibians share halo-ness as repitles or are they more akin to fish?



Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Randomcuriosity on June 12, 2008, 04:32:12 PM
Maybe there would really be something like a real "Lion's Den" kinda thing, where the criminal would be sentenced to "death" (aka lion chow) In this situation, a crier would be used to alert a big cat member of society that is not biased to come and eat it, after being killed using a technique htat would mimick Human's "putting to sleep" an old cat or bad dog.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Zachary Braun on June 12, 2008, 05:34:16 PM
I would have to say that the consumption of all meat is highly discouraged in society; even criminals shouldn't be eaten. The dead might be eaten in secret by the weaker-willed. The large carnivores would have to adapt their basic yearnings for meat if they were to want to stay in society. I don't know how the big snakes and big cats would do it, currently.

Maybe there are some "non-standard" proteins (like snake skin or insect eggs) or ingestible catalysts that would allow them to get by.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Strokend on June 12, 2008, 05:45:11 PM
Isn't it legal to eat wilds?
For the larger animals, perhaps they would gather a bunch of insects and crush them into a large food thing for the bigger carnivores?


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: natoon on June 12, 2008, 06:27:49 PM
  It's not really obvious from the background story you provided for us, but I think this halo occurance seems to have spread slowly over the earth eventually affecting all chordates.  Or not?  Anyway, you explain this took hundreds of years.  I'm just guessing, but it seems it would take maybe 2 or 3 thousand years to go from the beginnings of cognizant thought and speech among animals and getting them to a point where societies with disparate species cooperate fully with each other.  
  Now compare that to the millions of years it takes for a carnivore to evolve into an omnivore. Wouldn't it just be easier and smarter of all of them to find a way to eat, through customs, traditions, and societal mores, what their designed to eat?  No animal is going to willingly march off into extinction just because society frowns on what (or who) they have to eat. Most animals aren't really societal by nature anyway.  Is there something about having a halo brain that compells them to get along even at cost of their own life? Then, why do societals look at wilds as commodities? You'd think they would have a strong aversion to "using" them as they do to "using" the bodies of other species for food.
  They have to make such an enormous techological advance - beyond, really what humans are able to do right now (we've only had to deal with one species, and a pretty catholic eater that species is to boot) it's difficult to understand why they would pass right over the obvious lo tech cultural solution to this problem and go straight to "everybody has to eat plants and invertibrates only - if you can't hack it, too bad!"
Cats of any type could not hack it.  Snakes could not. Birds of prey such as hawks, eagles, vultures, owls. Really, if you have species surviving inside this society for generations they need better than subsistance level food to conceive and rear litters (maybe that's what happened to Quintet's first family?) It would take horticultural technology far in advance of our own to create something these guys could safely eat.  It doesn't look like animal society is that far along yet - they're still out in the woods gathering (but not hunting).


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Zachary Braun on June 12, 2008, 06:49:35 PM
Strokend: I was just thinking of that... some kind of giant protein pellets made by specialists (like the zany bat at the innovation exhibition). As disgusting as it sounds to us, a pest roach farm would be pretty successful thanks to the bugs' huge size and high reproduction rate.

Wilds aren't legal to eat, in the sense that an animal wouldn't be allowed to go off and kill one. (The same way we wouldn't go off and kill natives of the Amazon.. most of us.) This is because all animals have halo brains, regardless of caste or creed. Recognizing this, ordinary citizens would respect wild animals. Maybe not enough to hold off from eating a dead one, though...

On that page 22, in the fevered auction audience, "legal meat?!" meant "it's perfectly okay to eat them because they're not even animals (people like us)." This reveals the desperate prejudice of some of those societal-underbelly innovators, and hints at a black market for meat, like natoon suggested. "Could it be possible? Legal meat? These are teachers. If they can pull something like this, maybe we have a chance to get meat back into society!"

In that context, it makes me realize that eating meat may have the same connotation as doing drugs, or a drug trade. It's telling that Meander didn't react until the teachers mentioned vacation. (Or maybe he didn't hear through the crowd.)

But I think Rule was misunderstood there. He meant that in extreme situations, one wouldn't have to feel guilty about eating, since there was nothing to cause guilt: He reveals the vacation aspect in the very next panel.

Natoon: Your reply raises a good question, something that will be answered in a future story arc: Indeed, why abandon one's own nature?

Although you do mention, "Then, why do societals look at wilds as commodities? You'd think they would have a strong aversion to 'using' them as they do to "using" the bodies of other species for food." This was one of the main issues between Meander and Rule. Meander was adamant that wild animals aren't something to just go and take advantage of; they're people. Rule thought otherwise: that because they were not productive members of society, they should be subject to its influences. In other words, wild animals should "roll over" for society, because society has more power. He knew that everyone didn't think like he did, which was why his project with Polarizing was kept as secret as possible. When Meander found out, he erupted! Quintet seemed to be looking out only for herself. It's an interesting portrait of three types of concerns.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: sabsVIRIDiiAN on June 13, 2008, 06:13:10 AM
I have a question! In fact, I have so many that they tend to slip around and be forgotten, but I'll try to remember them all...

Firstly, how is an individual's family life in the NOFNA world? Obviously, it's probably different in coordination with an individual's history and status, but where do animals live in their refined societies? Wilds and the like probably live in their nature dens and habitats, but how do animals that speak common and attend the college live?

Do they have generally holed out trees/burrows/cliff sides, but fit out into a slightly more complex format? (ie: like an area for eating? A section of home for sleeping? Though that may be found in wild/natural instances as well). How difficult is it for an individual just graduated from the college to earn itself a new home? Do some individuals even live outside without a distinct den?

Do the colleges provide homes?

Furthermore, how is family life? (Or am I getting too into this? xD) We already know that family members or close friends will often address each other by the more personal last two initials of an animal's scent name, but is there a heavily close connection with family, in both action and principal? Or just the opposite: family is very loose still in society? Or are family lives heavily varied all together?

Yeah, lots of questions, but curiosity near hurt anyone but the cat, I suppose. :];;


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Zachary Braun on June 13, 2008, 10:55:53 AM
Hey Sabs!

I imagine that family life in the NofNA world is much like family life in our world:

We have societal norms we must conform to, but at home, we are free to be who we feel like. Because of this, it seems like there is still a deep connection to what animals feel is right for them. This means that there would probably be little change in den/nest/home structure. The structure might be influenced by theses or interests (like how Syncope had collected a lot of bugs in human jars/glasses). We may also see animals imitating one another based on style and usefulness. But we are not so far along in society that there would be such a departure from natural preferences for a home. (The animal societies aren't populous enough yet, in my opinion.) Meander, for instance, gave me the impression that he doesn't have a den--he lives outside--but he does call a specific small space his territory, his "property". (Seems like "territory" became "property" in our society, too.)

Colleges may provide a small space for a home, or an animal might have a property/territory outside the range. There is a lot of time in the day, and while we usually spend it doing whatever we need to do in our society, I think that animals would have a lot of spare time, and can use that time to travel long distances with little thought.

These deeply ingrained aspects of animal life probably carry over to family life, with little change in family structure or habit beyond what society deems acceptable. For instance, baby rabbits might be left along for a long time by the mother, but there might be a strong emphasis on formative education, which might prompt her to also stay home more often. I think eating the babies would be right out!


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: sabsVIRIDiiAN on June 13, 2008, 03:15:13 PM
Okay, thanks! That definitely answered my question. Sorry to ask so many about one subject. xD


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Arc on June 13, 2008, 04:59:00 PM
You mentioned that Syncope kept his collection in human jars and glasses.

This would imply that human items find their way (through whatever means) to the animal society.

Do animals acknowledge the existance of some other species that made said items, and to what extent? Has there been any attempt to find out about the humans? Or do most just think "Hey, cool. Nice things that no animal can craft show up every now and then. I kind of wonder where they might have come from, but it's probably not important."

Is human item collecting a viable job? Perhaps creatures by the sea comb the beaches to see what sort of things have swept up in order to take the more useful things (such as whole containers) to trade with at market?

How would said items be viewed? I can see them being viewed as oddities, albeit useful ones, and perhaps some would hold their use in contempt ("What? Animal goods not good enough for you?") If so, those who make a career out of collecting/identifying said items might not be considered "respectable" by society.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Randomcuriosity on June 13, 2008, 06:00:10 PM
I've been wondering the same question. How evolved are humans at this time? What impact do they have on animals? Because of hte slightly altered begining, how different are they from us?


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Zachary Braun on June 13, 2008, 07:08:48 PM
My impression of humans in NofNA is that they are like a force of nature. There's no controlling them, there's no understanding them. They are too weird. But the animals do know that they exist. Where they earn a fearful reputation (such as on game reserves), they are feared, but otherwise they are just like wild animals with strange desires and contraptions. They don't come into contact often (I imagine NofNA stories taking place within huge preserves). I think that animals make the connection between airplanes and humans, the same way we would make a connection between aliens and a UFO.

If any one animal were to study animal history, he or she could know that animal society is modeled after human society. In what exact ways is unfathomable to the common animal.

I'm not sure how human items would be viewed, since the concept of "an item", to do something, is somewhat foreign to animals, especially to those who don't even have hands. They are mainly objects of curiosity. Animals have made do with their alembics and styles fine, so they don't seem to even think to need tools yet. (Weapon users are playfully chided for choosing a useless profession)


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Hellsion on June 14, 2008, 06:00:30 AM
is the right section for this?

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v712/hellsion/gohlht7foutd75t9ig.jpg)

and thats my question(s)


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Randomcuriosity on June 14, 2008, 06:09:47 AM
OH NUUU a stripper horse?!? :o


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Strokend on June 14, 2008, 09:50:17 AM
My guess is that the horse is a criminal, and has to serve that monkey(?).
EDIT: Or, perhaps that horse 'sold' his/her services, so (s)he'll help to haul things around.
E2: As for that big green thing, I'm thinking it's a symbol or emblem, it represents the group that owns the place.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: natoon on June 14, 2008, 12:45:27 PM
He wouldn't need the leash if he were going willingly and had a mind.  Apparently, whatever's going on, he's either is compelled to cooperate - at the point of a metanoia - the leash being merely a symbol of shame - or he is vacuous. I got the feeling these people aren't exactly the sweetest folks in town.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Zachary Braun on June 14, 2008, 05:06:34 PM
To tell you the truth, this is too far back in the story for me to remember.

I don't think it's a vacuous horse. Thinking about it now, it seems more like an indentured criminal or some other kind of captive. Perhaps there's no law aspect at all. It seems weird that something as large as a horse would allow itself to be led around.

But Strokend is right about the emblem.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Strokend on June 14, 2008, 06:02:40 PM
Maybe you intended for the horse to be blind, so it had to be led around.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Hellsion on June 14, 2008, 07:49:43 PM
To tell you the truth, this is too far back in the story for me to remember.

maybe it was just a random thought to begin with, I get a lot of those.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Kaiyodei on June 15, 2008, 02:47:55 AM
i thought the horse was a wild caught slave for some reason.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Strokend on June 26, 2008, 09:09:21 AM
Hey! I've got a question... To humans, the word "Anthropology" means the study of human origins. Would the animals of NofNA use Anthropology as the study of their own origins, or of the strange organisms (humans)?


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Kaiyodei on June 26, 2008, 05:18:54 PM
ahh i have no clue. only he knows that.
anthrophmorphiclolgy?

Zack what about psychotic animals and uh. ones who are having psychologlocal aliments and animals with seral killing cannilbisms.

I can't think good now I'm sick or something.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: natoon on June 26, 2008, 10:19:28 PM
Anthro refers to humans; as in "anthropomorphism" meaning projecting humanlike qualities onto things nonhuman. The study of animal history would "zoopology" I think.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Kaiyodei on June 27, 2008, 12:07:27 AM
yeh. sound right, if there furries then what? deranged homosapian-xyz crosses.
monkey men and werewolve.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Randomcuriosity on June 27, 2008, 12:37:22 AM
I don't think the humans in NOfNA are doing  those kinds of things. Except for the First man-ape guy 120 years ago.

Then again, where'd he come from?


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Strokend on June 27, 2008, 02:38:29 AM
The Ape Man was an early stage of Human, I think, even an early stage of Neanderthal. And it would be written as zoology. You have the word (or part of it), then add "ology" to it. Anthropology comes from the word "Anthropoid" and the suffix "-ology" which means to study.
Quote from: Kaiyodei
If they're furries, then what? Deranged homosapian-xyz crosses.
Uh, what? (I think I properly grammar-tized the first sentence, but I don't know what's going on in the second one) What's with the "-xyz" thing?

Hey, I've got another question about the world of NofNA... Do hermaphrodites and morphodites exist? Are they allowed to exist, or killed right off? (For those wondering, hermaphrodites and morphodites have the sexual organs of both male and female, with their chromosomes having more than one X and at least one Y. The difference between hermaphrodites and morphodites is that hermaphrodites have higher estrogen levels and take more after females, whereas morphodites have higher testosterone levels and take more after males)


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Zachary Braun on June 27, 2008, 10:47:38 AM
Hi everyone,

As I figure it (for myself), at this point in time, animal culture isn't advanced enough to conceive of the desire to go out and study things other than themselves. At least, on such a massive scale that it would engender its own field of study. Anthropology is the study of our own societies throughout time. I think this could exist in the animals' future, when things are more stable.

Psychotic and psychopathological animals definitely exist; this is why Nature of Nature's Fist was made in the first place. I at first wanted to showcase the psychopathology of mankind. By the time NofNF became NofNA, I wanted to showcase the art. But psychology is a strong theme.

There could be abnormal genetic mutations, especially as we move further down the line. Civilized animals are genetically taming themselves away from their wild counterparts. The taming process has been shown to engender genetic corruption.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Kaiyodei on June 27, 2008, 01:24:46 PM
are you ever going to show us anything about a life of a wild? are are they like normal animals but with halos and are smarter?

we saw Meander go crazy by burn out. will we ever see a real "canniblistic" muderer?

you said there were people here or there what achivments have they done, like in genitic sciences?
like how in my talking animal comic i wanted to add retro-enginerred dinosaurs.
(somehow you can make a chicken grow teeth and a tail and more scales though dinos had differnt skin)


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Randomcuriosity on June 27, 2008, 06:26:56 PM
I'm pretty sure that there is a difference between wilds and "Wilds". Like, there are normal animals, with no halo, and halo animals who chose to live like their wild counterparts. (one of my rp chars is the latter, having grown up in the forest.)

I guess (correct me if I'm wrong) you could compare college to a human's "public school" and Halo-wilds to "home schooling"


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Strokend on June 27, 2008, 07:55:21 PM
what about hermaphrodites and morphodites?


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: natoon on June 27, 2008, 09:47:56 PM
In a species that is normally male - female, I'm assuming, as a genetic mutation?  From what i can tell, these NoFNA civilised folk are pretty non- stressed out about sexual matters in gerneral.  They don't seem to have any taboos around sex and its practice, although they seem real concerned about not giving in to the "base animal." So I would think, it would be no bigger deal than being an unusual color or having a different hair coat than others of your species.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Kaiyodei on June 27, 2008, 11:46:43 PM
isn't hermaphriditeizm on the rise in polarbears?


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Stella on June 28, 2008, 12:43:31 AM
@Natoon: Actually I think there are taboos regaurding sexuality, but the only thing I've seen so far deals with the species aspect.  Meaning that cats mate with cats and etcetera.

This brings up teh question about hybrid animals like wolfdogs, ligers and sparred owls.  Since their genetics are so alike would those kind of pairings acceptable in animal culture?


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Zachary Braun on June 28, 2008, 05:29:35 AM
I should clarify that every animal has a halo brain, no matter the society in which they are born. The vacuous animal--animals like ours--does not exist. It was manufactured by Rule and Polarizing's efforts. Terms like "wild" and "civilized" only relate to which society a given animal belongs, and have no bearing on physiology or "meta"physiology such as the halo brain.

Wild animals chose to remain with their instincts as nature directed them. It was the civilized animals who made a choice to depart from this. Because of the approach to this choice, there may be a slight physiological difference between them that altered their thinking.

Currently, I don't have plans for a story about a wild animal. But it's so early in NofNA's lifespan. Let's wait a few arcs and see.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Kaiyodei on June 28, 2008, 04:17:17 PM
OH? didn't Polarizing say they once were all vacuous?

so I guess one cannot be malformed and born brainless, seeing how one can be born with half a physcal brain in our reality.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Zachary Braun on June 28, 2008, 09:41:23 PM
He will say that: but in the context of theory. No vacuous animal has ever been observed "in the wild".

Currently, I don't have plans for such an arc that showcases that level of a physical deformity. In the wild, an animal born in such a way would quickly be left to die. Our own modern society has a very strong infrastructure that is able to support such deformities. Civilized animals are somewhere in between, but their technology and societal infrastructure is still distinctly primitive.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Kaiyodei on June 28, 2008, 11:16:06 PM
well there's always fan fiction/comics eh? if the writer gets your universe right.

ALSO, how do breeding based realtionships act in the world? do they work as the species still do? do cats breed as they would like ours? Quitent's father up and left, is that normal? do some help raise offspring then leave?

the animals are as ours are and adults after a first heat, and there is no qualms in, a freshly adulted elephant having a mate that is like, 20+ years older. I mean there would not be any, unless you are squicked and think of one of them as a 16 yr old human and the other a 50 year old human.

I'm rambling.
this is just revelent I guess for people who want to do fanish things.

does Kertin have a harem of hot rabbit does?


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Strokend on June 29, 2008, 05:10:55 AM
does Kertin have a harem of hot rabbit does?

I think THAT one belongs in the QAC (Questions About the Characters) thread.  ;)


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Randomcuriosity on July 02, 2008, 07:36:33 PM
Lol  ;D this is fun. So, all the animals in the world are halo-ed, right?


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Strokend on July 03, 2008, 09:06:17 PM
Unless there's a joke in there I didn't catch (I haven't played any Halo games if that's what it is), that's already been covered.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Devilchun on July 06, 2008, 05:04:13 AM
Uhhhm.

Back on the subject of large carnivores living in a largely vegetarian society, perhaps they might've developed a style to suppress the need for meat? If they can trick themselves into thinking they have extra limbs/are super fast/other physiological changes, could they trick themselves into thinking they're herbivorous? Anywho, just throwing about ideas. xD

I do have a main question, actually. Is it acceptable, in the world of civilized animals, to consume milk? What about to use wool, or to eat unfertilized eggs? Is it okay to eat a fertilized egg, if the parents say so (I would assume not - but you never know)? Or is there a taboo on all the above listed? On some of them?

Just curious. :3


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Zachary Braun on July 06, 2008, 06:24:46 AM
Hey Devilchun,

Some good questions. Even if the animals could convince themselves that they don't have to eat meat, could their bodies be influenced by their minds enough in order to forego such nutrients, such as the taurine cited by natoon, and iron? Could styles exist that grant new digestive powers to carnivorous stomachs? It's not set in stone yet, so creative answers could be anywhere you choose.

Your egg question is an ethical one. Could egg-laying animals happen to know which eggs are fertilized? Even so, is there a moral dilemma in eating what could have been a possible life? Like people in our society, the acquisition of milk and eggs might be dependent on the people willing to help... or perhaps some don't even care! I do know that milk is a food primarily meant for babies, and not for adult digestive tracts (homo sapiens sapiens included), but like us, it might certainly be used for food in emergencies. If I'm not mistaken, not all animals have the ability to create lactose. Another digestive problem.

Wool seems pretty plausible, since it can be sheared off with no consequences. In the summer it would even be a relief!


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Strokend on July 06, 2008, 08:25:57 AM
Perhaps wool can be used to cushion extremely rough ground. And I agree with Zach on the egg thing. Milk might be 'extracted' from false-(milk filling?) cases and used to put certain proteins into the 'capsules' for carnivores.

As for a style, it would be VERY tough to convince oneself that they're an herbivore when they're a carnivore (omnivores can do it a lot more easily I'm sure) for this sake, in my opinion. However, I'm sure they have the ability to convince themselves that they are omnivores, so that their digestive enzymes themselves are modified in having the ability to digest plants and meat, coupled with eating plants, meat, and capsules.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Devilchun on July 06, 2008, 03:36:16 PM
Omnivores, yes. :3 That makes more sense - rather than tricking themselves into not needing the protein and iron and such - tricking themselves into liking their adapted diet of bugs, plants, fish, and "capsules."


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Strokend on July 06, 2008, 11:48:51 PM
After all, I do believe herbivores themselves became omnivores...


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Deaddancecrow on July 09, 2008, 10:28:43 PM
Well since fish and bugs aren't "thinking" animals in this world..they could fill a predators stomach and for the minerals, they can also lick on special stones or as meander did, eat vegetables. wolves also eat mushrooms and berries, why not the other meat eaters?


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Strokend on July 11, 2008, 02:56:19 PM
That's probably what they do.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: natoon on July 11, 2008, 04:19:09 PM
Because not all meat eaters are the same. Each evolved to fill their own unique niche. Some can handle other stuff. Some can't.

I have a question - why are fish excluded from halodom?  Putting the contrivance of "carnivores have to eat something aside, they do have brains. Surely many of them are as well developed neurologically as amphibians.  And some non-chordate animals have some pretty complex brains (I'm thinking octopi and such.)  I'm thinking it's more a personal decision for the eater whether the eatee is O.K. to eat (remember Meander's stopping Quintet from eating the spider, even though in the past he was a bug eater?)

And if fish are too low on the brain totem pole to have a halo, where does that leave humans?  I know Strokend has posited that humans may be too dependant on their physical brains to need a halo brain.  So, somehow this massive ubiquious effect only changed the neouro makup of the middle of the road brains?  Perhaps at one time every living thing had a halo for a while, but it kind of fizzled out on the life forms that couldn't use it or didn't need it?  That would mean there could be gaps. Certain species or even groups of individuals where it died out.  It may even indicate a "use it or lose it" phenomenon. Sorry if I'm all over the place. One question seems to uncover another.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Zachary Braun on July 11, 2008, 09:42:07 PM
Hi natoon,

Fish do have a halo brain. Even insects have a "brain" that extends beyond the physical brain. Their carriage simply makes them seem too foreign to empathize with. For this reason, animals have fooled themselves into thinking that these strange classes are a kind of mindless, exploitable species. Perhaps by necessity.

Much as we might try to communicate with something foreign and receive no perceptible signal, such as light beyond the visible spectrum, or sound outside of a human hearing range.

In short, animal society (or at least, some animal societies) isn't "secure" enough to recognize these otherworldly animals yet.

We're going to see problems with food later on because of this. But that's in NofNA's distant future.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Kaiyodei on July 12, 2008, 05:46:24 PM
well, there are always infertile eggs. some times they are laied without fertilization.

maybe someone has a job to produce feeder eggs? and because they make food eggs they get to live a special life of being feed and not forgaging?


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Deaddancecrow on July 12, 2008, 06:17:12 PM
Well I think that predators who cannot fit in this society because their diet isn't meant to eat vegetables and fruits have to stay outside..."wild" but not vacuous. Maybe some predators died out b'caus of this...
on the other hand...there could be birds that breed infertile eggs for the greater common and maybe they receive a better life like Kaiyodei said.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: natoon on July 13, 2008, 12:13:38 AM
Kaiodei,
It seems that reproduction is slowed quite a bit amongst "civies", not sure if this is intentional or a side effect of being on the cusp of civility and not needing the "insurance" of a big family to survive. (Otherwise, Quintet would have had a couple litters of her own by now, forget about her mom's litter!)  I'm thinking a civilised bird would look upon bartering her eggs for food purposes very carefully,  even the infertile ones, as they might be rather infrequent.  As stringent as the veggie laws are, it's probably one of  those "iffy" grey areas that give the Rationale headaches.
 
Deaddancecrow,
You're probably right, but I think they wouldn't need die out unless they couldn't get far enough away from civilised (and well defended) populations.

Zachary,
Thank you!
So everybody does have a halo!
I wonder if schools of fish and swarms of insects can have a "collective intellegence," linking halos.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Kaiyodei on July 16, 2008, 02:18:40 PM
do animals that lack physical brains have halos?
*dies*


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Zachary Braun on July 16, 2008, 08:54:01 PM
Kai,

It's hard to say. I'm not sure of the answer to that yet. Specifically with computer AIs. I think the answer is "no".


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Strokend on July 17, 2008, 05:26:36 PM
How can you lack a physical brain and still be living to HAVE a Halo?


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Hellsion on July 18, 2008, 05:29:52 AM
jellyfish?


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Zachary Braun on July 18, 2008, 06:41:42 AM
In terms of what is going on in 10%+, what with how the "identity" is being narrowed down to "decision" (and all the criteria needed to make decisions), one could theoretically take all of that data and upload it into a storage drive. If we then take a powerful CPU capable of deciphering that data, and then give it objectives, we have a "person". This non-organic person might not have a halo brain. I'm not sure if the halo brain is tied to an organic or biological existence yet.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Rhiannon on September 26, 2008, 07:52:23 AM
About drinking milk. Human originally couldn't drink milk. They actually evolved a gene that allowed them to digest lactose even after they'd reached adulthood. People who are lactose intolerant are actually people who don't have this gene. Therefor animal could also logically develop this gene. However it is the question of whether they did or animal would allow other animals to drink milk from them. It's relatively easy for us because we've domesticated cows and they don't really have a say in the matter.

Another thing was I though of that carnivores may be able to get nutrients is through specially bred plants or fungi. Most likely when animals first developed halo brain they didn't suddenly begin to get along. They may have even had wars or at least skirmishes with other groups of animal, which carnivores could have eaten the dead from. Then as society progressed and they became more peaceable they began to breed plants with more of the nutrients they needed and as they did, adapted to eat them more than they did other animals. Until they reached the point where they didn't need to eat other animals, even though they still could. That would also solve the problem of their teeth being the same, because they would have used them for fighting.

Just some thoughts.
-------------------------------------------------------
EDIT:
Here's an example I thought of for the breeding of the mushrooms/plants and society developing from a violent to a more peaceful one (I kind of made it a story because that's what popped into my head). I'll use a pride of lions for it because they're already social animals:

Animals already have halo brains. The lions are currently at war with the wildebeests. The lions have always hunted the wildebeest, but now that they are smarter the wildebeest have started fighting back. The lions occasionally entitle the help of other local predators like hyenas, leopards, and cheetahs occasionally and they wildebeest are allied with other herbivores such as antelope, oryx, or even elephants. The predators eat the dead from the battles or just straight out hunt the herbivores.

Some generations later...
The lions have discovered a new kind of mushroom that gives them enough nutrients that they don't have to kill the wildebeest as ofter, provoking them less. They use the mushrooms as a good that they trade with other lions and predators.

Some generations later...
Some of the lions may have begun to feel there is something morally wrong with killing another creature that can think and feel and are feeling the losses from such a drawn out war, but as a majority they still hunt the wildebeest. They have begun farming the mushrooms and they are in high demand. They have also begun breeding special strains of mushrooms that contain more nutrients.

Some generations later...
They lions and other predators send embassies to the herbivores offering peace. It takes a long time to negotiate as they struggle through language barriers and old hatreds, but perhaps the war has finally stopped. The lions can now live totally on a diet of the mushroom, fish, bugs, and maybe other plants they've begun to grow. Some still hunt the wildebeest, but they're generally shunned.

Some generations later...
All the animals are at peace. They have developed a primitive version of common in the area (they haven't socialized with animals from other regions yet). A few groups still live as 'wilds' and some fall to their inner animal and eat the dead or buy illegal meat (like the whole meat/drugs concept).

This story may have been echoed throughout the entire animal world until society has reached what it is today.


Sorry I'm rather long-winded, but the idea just popped in my head and I couldn't help but make a story about it. I'm not saying this is what happened, it's just an idea.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: natoon on October 06, 2008, 04:41:13 PM
I think mushrooms would have to make up only a small part of  their diet, at least in the raw form.  All mushrooms have some poison in them in the raw state. "Safe" mushrooms lose the poison when you cook, them, but even button mushrooms will make you sick if you eat a lot of raw ones.  Fish is a fine substitute if you can get them, but they are as sentient as the lions. Also, mushrooms have a pretty low concentration of nutrition in them, and carnivores like lions need high nutriton (like in meat) because they have short intestines which means not much time to digest things.
I really like your storyline, though!  If we knew how the animals got halo brains, maybe we could figure out a way in which the phenomena that created it could also effect some plant or fungus/mold/slime stuff in such a way to help make a meat substitute for carnivores?


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Strokend on October 08, 2008, 03:41:50 PM
Actually, it sounds like a good thought. It is possible that there are mushrooms or plants high in nutrients - they can be crossbred through their pollen of the flower form (or spores in the case of mushrooms) to have just a small amount needed for the necessary nutrients. As Zachary said, there are 'pellets' or some such that help for their 'texturous' food needs, which the nutrients have been mixed into.


Title: Re: Questions about the world
Post by: Kaiyodei on November 23, 2008, 04:30:54 PM
so who makes the food? primates?