#monster taxonomy

[ambyandony]

Monster AU - Monster Taxonomy [P1]

[P1: what the fuck is taxonomy and why does it matter in a monster AU]

short answer it doesn't. you dont have to care butgod i fucking love classifying things an d making up names. and also there are some intricacies that taxonomy can help elaborate on when it comes to species.

Taxonomy is the scientific practise of ascribing names, categories and classifications to living things based on characteristics both individual and shared between different creatures. There is a taxonomical hierarchy that goes as follows, from least to most specific: domain, kingdom, phylum (sometimes division in botany), class, order, family, genus, and species (plus subspecies).

Most things you think of as living fall under the domain Eukaryota, so you can assume everything I talk about belongs to Eukaryota unless otherwise stated. A major part of taxonomy is binomial nomenclature, by which species are given a scientific name consisting of two parts, the genus and the species. These scientific names typically have Latin roots or are named after a proper noun, but other languages are also in my repertoire.

Vulpes vulpes, the red fox, is the species vulpes in the genus Vulpes, and Tyto multipunctata, the lesser sooty owl, is the species multipunctata in the genus Tyto.

Any normal person will call these 'the red fox' and the 'lesser sooty owl' or just 'the fox' and 'the owl', but taxonomically, they both have a very specific classification.

From kingdom to species, the red fox is: Animalia > Chordata > Mammalia > Carnivora > Canidae > Vulpes > Vulpes vulpes the lesser sooty owl is: Animalia > Chordata > Aves > Strigiformes > Tytonidae > Tyto > Tyto multipunctata.

See, they share a kingdom and phylum, Animalia and Chordata, more or less because they are both animals with spines. But then they diverge as their characteristics differ; in this case, the difference between mammals (Mammalia) and birds (Aves) is their morphology and reproduction; mammals have mammaries (breasts) and give live birth, and birds have no mammaries and lay eggs. Each further specification on the taxonomical hierarchy indicates a more specific list of shared traits between creatures in that classification.

Taxonomy helps to identify species that are related or have common traits. And why does it matter? Simply because monsters aren't human (Okay, well, on that front it can be a little complicated) and there are many different kinds of monsters that fall under a single umbrella label; for example, maricrypts or "seafolk", which may not even fall within the same genus. Maricrypts are commonly widely miscategorised as 'mermaids' no matter what they actually are, but there are countless actual 'kinds' of 'mermaids'. Squalo, a merrow, is fundamentally different from a siren or a selkie. Lycanthropy is a bit of a special confusing case, but I'll get into that later.

In other words, monsters aren't Homo sapiens and the term "monsters" is a catch-all term for a category of beings who shall be known henceforth in scientific contexts as cryptians (yes, I know, "monsters" is the common term, "monsters" is more recognised, I'm using "monster" for the titling of my notes, but "monsters" is also a lot more derogatory and weird when you consider that angels and gods can also fall in the category).

Cryptians or 'monsters' are not an actual class or genus, as the creatures under the umbrella of the term are far too varied; some cryptians are human-adjacent, but not all of them are, and even those who look human-adjacent might belong to entirely different classes. (hint, theres a nonzero entirely likely chance that polymorphs don't belong to the chordata phylum!!!)

And I'm a sucker for coming up with words (and being silly).

See, officially, cryptians don't have any taxonomical classifications (and 'cryptian' is a protologism) because most people don't believe in them and those who do believe in them want them fuckin dead(/double dead in the case of the undead) a pretty good amount of the time. Nobody is like actually studying cryptians at least not in an organised way. kind of like how monster medicine cant be standardised because all the monster-friendly doctors keep getting fucking killed / incarcerated for malpractice and fraud

But we're talking biology here! Perhaps a scientist with an interest in cryptobiology would want to classify cryptians and perhaps that scientist is hypothetically me (not a scientist) and I'm going to come up with scientific names and figure out some classifications for my monster research notes thing. field research woooo!!!! (update: starting to reconsider the whole enthusiastic "field research wooo" thing) (update 2: ow)

Monster Taxonomy Page 1 Subsection A:

[WIP]

Monster Taxonomy Page 2:

[WIP]

(( Stick around if you're interested and leave if you dont give a fuck . i dont care i fucking love rambling about my monster au. please ask me (and/or my sona who 'wrote' this) about it

ill update this post with more related posts and you can check the monster taxonomy/monster au lore tags.

note: this is a revised version of a post id already made a while ago. wanted to reword some stuff. Also wanted to establish these notes are written quasi-in-character 'by' Bambi, the jjba monster au variant of my sona . "enthused cryptotaxonomist moments" means Bambi (the enthused cryptotaxonomist) has dubious authorship of the lore contained .

I say dubious authorship because you can kind of tell that some of the lore is written with a lot more omniscience and knowledge of things Bambi couldnt really know about ))

[enthusedbambi-jjba-au]

i think i need to make a chart im starting to lose track of what is and isn't really a mammal. among other things

~ bambi the confused cryptotaxonomist

[somethingusefulfromflorida]

My mom bought me this book for Christmas

The Resurrectionist by EB Hudspeth, a fantasy field guide full of anatomical illustrations of monsters and cryptids.

The musculoskeletal systems are fun to look at, but not nearly as in-depth as I would have liked. If you have more than a passing knowledge of taxonomy (or in my case, access to Wikipedia), a lot of the details fall apart under scrutiny

The harpy has four upper limbs connected to one shoulder girdle; it shouldn't have arms, only wings

The sphinx is not classified as a mammal, but is still somehow in the family Felidae with cats (and like the harpy is also drawn with only two girdles despite having six limbs. I will give the author credit for giving the sphinx a keel for the wing muscles to attach to)

It lists the Hindu deity Genesha as a cryptid, which is a no-no.

Cerberus is also explicitly not a mammal, but somehow still a canine (literally in the species Canis with wolves, dogs, and coyotes)

Both mermaids and dragons are listed as members of the order Caudata; the only extant members of Caudata are salamanders, which kinda makes sense for dragons, but not so much for mermaids (also, the author keeps playing it fast and loose with cladistics; both mermaids and dragons are in the same order despite being in different classes, and while dragons are explicitly said to be amphibians, mermaids are given the fictional class mammicthyes, which means mammal-fish. At that point, why not just call mermaids amphibians? Why make up a fake latin hybrid name?)

But what bugs me most of all is the classification of the Minotaur as its own order of mammal when in mythology it is explicitly described as a hybrid of two known species (made possible only by the cruel machinations of the divine, but still)

To use actual taxonomical nomenclature, the minotaur's species would be B. taurus × H. sapiens (specifically B. taurus♂ × H. sapiens♀; there are, to my knowledge, no legends of H. sapiens♂ × B. taurus♀). That's how ligers, tigons, mules, zorses, pizzly bears, narlugas, etc., are described.

If I had written this book, I would have leaned more into evolutionary biology. Most land animals have four limbs because they all evolved from boney lobe-finned fish, which split off from the boneless sharks and rays millions of years earlier, so any six-limbed vertebrates would need to be descended from a fictitious category of six-finned fish which would either be an offshoot of boney fish/tetrapods (I guess they'd be hexapods, though that term refers to insect arthropods), OR a precursor to boney and cartilaginous fish that both clades split away from much earlier (it's easier to lose structures than to gain them, so it makes more sense for a six-limbed ancestor to spawn four-limbed descendants than the other way around).

Think about how different elephants are from humans, and humans are from aligators, and aligators are from penguins, and remember that they all evolved from the same ancestor tiktaalik, an amphibious fish that existed some 375 million years ago. Imagine a precursor six-limbed species and how diverse all its descendants would look after 400 million years. Save for the occasional instance of convergent evolution causing two unrelated species to independently evolve similar body plans to fill the same niche, tetrapods and hexapods would look nothing alike. There would be very little recognizable overlap between the two. A six-limbed "pegasus" would not look like a real world horse, and a six-limbed "dragon" would not look reptilian/dinosaur-ish, for much the same reason that giraffes don't look like frogs; they're just too distantly related. Bonless sharks and boney fish and whales/dolphins all have similar looking bodyplans only because their environment requires the same hydrodynamic shape, while terrstrial vertebrates are much more physically diverse.

[iamthekaijuking]

It’s finally here! The new and improved 2023 version of my Piscine wyverns, most leviathans, and true elder dragons phylogenetic tree.

There is quite the substantial difference between this version and the older ones. Each species profile is also more in depth than my last tree, the flying wyvern tree, because there’s a lot more room for speculation in these monsters. A lot of this is also recontextualizing and reworking many outlandish traits some of these monsters have and basically giving a lot of canon/what some of the hunters guild tells us the middle finger. Some of the scientific names for the families were made by my fellow poopenshitter TheCuriousOne. They came up with the names for their own tree and allowed me to use some of these names too.

Because the written description is almost 100,000 characters long, I had to put it in a google doc that you can read here! I even added a chapter index so you can skip to the families you want to read.

This is probably the most in depth monster hunter cladogram on the internet

[dualbasilisk]

This Laios guy is just like me for real

[zedecksiew]

D&D's Obsession With Taxonomy

Like virtually everybody else in the TTRPG space I downloaded One D&D's playtest document to see what the fuss was.

One of the eyebrow-raising bits in that document is the boxed text titled "Children Of Different Humanoid Kinds":

"For example, folk who have a human parent and an orc or an elf parent are particularly common. Many other combinations are possible ... Finally, determine the average of the two options’ Life Span traits to figure out how long your character might live. For example, a child of a halfling and a gnome has an average life span of 288 years."

Many people have problems with this passage. I can see why. But when I read it I laughed.

Of course D&D would handle this thing this way.

"Determine the average of the two options' Life Span traits to figure out how long your character might live"; the ludicrous math precision of "288 years"?

These bits are quintessential D&D.

+

"D&D is racist!" discourse returns again and again, like a pair of annoying missionaries.

(I've used this metaphor before. I'm pleased with it. I will repeat it as often as people repeat "D&D is racist!" discourse online.)

But a conversation that Flo began on Discord about the thoul has given me a way to talk about "D&D is racist!" in a way that doesn't bore me.

+

What is a thoul?

"Thouls are magical crosses between ghouls, hobgoblins, and trolls. In spite of their ghoulish blood, they are living creatures, not undead."

Gus points out that "thoul" is likely a typo -- "transcription error (first use of thouls replaces 'toads' as entry above 'ghouls' on table transferred from Monsters and a treasure to ready ref sheets)"

(Here's a fun link about the thoul's possible origins.)

The Discord conversation descends into laughter.

Flo: "I think D&D does not need as many humanoids as it has."

+

Here's my thought:

D&D is racist is really: D&D is obsessed with taxonomy which is really: Nerds are obsessed with taxonomy

+

People arguing over the differences between a wyvern and a dragon; or

People insisting that Tolkien made a categorical distinction between orcs and goblins (no, he did not, go read "Lord of the Rings" again); or

People arguing about whether "Star Wars" is science fiction or science fantasy, and then arguing about the boundaries of science fantasy; or

What Are The Differences Between High Fantasy And Low Fantasy

Etc, etc, etc.

All of the above cliche-nerd-arguments are about more-or-less arbitrary distinctions. The utility of these categories tend to be vastly overblown.

+

Categories are useful.

There is a distinction between performance art and the performing arts because they arise from separate traditions; ditto the many strains of music genre.

But these are useful precisely because they communicate a history of people exercising agency -- creators choosing to define themselves in relation to history / tradition / peers, letting those things define their work.

Categories are subjective actions, not objective facts.

+

What the nerd approach to taxonomy ("a dragon is NOT a wyvern!!!") does well is make a field of knowledge / phenomena predictable, quantifiable: "This is the way the world is."

Therefore fully understandable: "I know the world."

Therefore possible to act on: "I know what do with the world."

You can solve it, apply best practices to it, optimise it, own it, possess it.

Definitive taxonomies like "goblin / hobgoblin / bugbear" is better for you because then you can shorthand these creatures into three separate and discrete scripts.

Instead of: "goblin people come in a lot of different sizes -- some are big, some are puny, some are kind, some are not -- it all depends. You got to just pay attention to each one."

Which makes things messier, more unpredictable, meaning you have to pay attention, exercise discretion / empathy more, possibly accommodate new perspectives.

"I know the bugbear better than it knows itself, I got this." vs "Okay so how do I get to know Ms Goblin better?"

+

When I posted these thoughts to Discord, Marcia observed:

"The connection between taxonomy and power, that nerds find it empowering to possess an abstract knowledge which they impose onto things, seems related to what has been identified as phallic desire ..."

(Meaning that this blogpost should really be titled D&D's Obsession With Phallic Desire , for maximum clickbait -- but this is Marcia's thought, don't wanna steal her thunder!)

+

One advantage to quantifiable, objective, abstracted taxonomies in games:

It helps with logistics in play.

The mental load for players in TTRPGs is already so high -- at least it is for me, weak-brained nerd as I am; I need some shorthand just to help my imagination along.

BUT!

If helping with mental load was the purpose for D&D obsessive taxonomy -- it'd be way simpler than it now is???

Tracking all the split hairs between D&D FINAL EDITION's ten thousand different Conditions is empathically not making play easier.

+

Back to the thoul. Gus again:

"Thouls - my take is they are interesting as a set of mechanics - but incoherent as a creature. The need to justify their abilities via existing monsters makes then nonsensical- better just to have them be some sort of manifestation of goblin magic or science ... That D&D chose instead to taxonomize them says something about D&D."

+

The thoul's "part ghoul, part troll, part hobgoblin" thing is much like the "half-dradkin half-celestial ranger 5 / paladin 7" NPCs you see in mainstream RPG adventure-path-type books.

Which is much like: "determine the average of the two options’ Life Span traits" and "288 years".

Aesthetically and ethically incoherent; mechanically convoluted -- but absolutely sensical if your purpose is to safeguard access to a highly taxonomised "objective" worldview.

Nerds don't mind figuring out complicated fractions of abstract objective absolutes. Because this means you can still ultimately sort reality into absolutes.

You can still grasp (in all senses of the word) the world.

That thought is safer / more advantageous than: "yeah you just gotta deal with things being a messy soup, people are not lines of code, you gotta pay attention to everything in its own context."

+

This is turning out to be a post assisted by Discord chorus.

Re: the drive for taxonomy-based worldbuilding -- and concurrent to thoughts about how Non-Diegetic Objective Maps Are Naff Actually -- Ava:

"the whole "fantasy worldbuilding, with its concrete ontologies and god's eye histories and maps replicates + reifies colonial epistemology" was the whole deal of my thesis."

(Ava you need to write a blogpost about this thesis!)

Re: literal scientific taxonomy -- Dan:

"D&D's obsession with taxonomy is weirder to me than normal taxonomic obsessions because of how hard it tries to ape natural sciences and then leaves out every possible interesting thing actually studying ecology could lead to."

Which sparked a discussion about the politics of binomial nomenclature, how there's a great deal of re-classification going on in scientific fields.

Syd:

"there’s actually been a lot of big reshuffles that have come out of the fact that people realized certain classifications had been from phenotypical similarities (physical characteristics) but not genotípicas relationships. And even when it isn’t political in the sense of changing names that we’re given as honorifics there’s actually a huge pushback just from people who think it shouldn’t change bc that’s historically how it was, even if it doesn’t fit our current models of what taxonomy is actually useful for in ecology and biology."

Something something, categories are subjective actions, not objective facts, something something.

Flo, with the final word:

"It's the same thing that gives the Internet sandwich discourse. 'Is x a sandwich?' A sandwich is not an objective fact. A sandwich is an idea. A sandwich is a category we choose to make."

+

( Image source: https://dmdavid.com/tag/the-strange-mystery-of-the-dd-monster-called-a-thoul/ )

[lost-darkmoon]

Throwing out my fictional taxonomy google sheet because one little bush baby looking monkey has five fingers while everything else has four

“Monster Hunter” lore rant follows

So Monster Hunter has two “humans”, regular humans and “Wyverians” who have 4 digits, long ears, and digitgrade feet (and some wild polymorphism). According to some lore, they’re descended from wyverns hence the name (this will become important later)

This world, in addition to dragons, land sharks, and giant crabs, has big mammalian creatures and primates. These primates have 4 digits, and often long ears and digitgrade feet. Some other creatures in this mammal group have scales, scutes, and reptilian eyes.

This world also has wyverns that resemble birds and dinosaurs, and an official taxonomy classifies them as dinosaurs. Unless the first little monkey developed an extra digit, I am thinking that:

Primates, and by extent “humans”, evolved twice, once from dinosaurs, and another perhaps like on Earth (amphibians and fish exist), or, they literally came from Earth (canonical) and found a niche in this terrible hellscape

Anyways everything’s a dinosaur unless it’s not, someone probably forgot to give the monkey 4 fingers, and my mental illness makes me do this past the point of fun

[vigiscar]

Cover art: Secondary School Biology

[ambyandony]

Monster AU - Monster Taxonomy [P2]

[P2: Human-Adjacent Species]

oh and please dont get me started on hybrids like . theyre like a whole different thing. ill get into it later its so complicated

First up, I want to try to tackle species that are adjacent to humans; not just species that look very human, but species that more or less actually theoretically exist near humans taxonomically.

So this includes mostly just (some) turned "vampires" and "ghosts" (I'll get to lycanthropy later), and I know that sounds fucking ridiculous because I have just listed what most consider The Undead, Like, People Who Have Died and yeah. That's kinda the idea of them being human-adjacent because they... kind of are humans. Or they were human, once. Also, like lycanthropy, being fucking undead isn't necessarily a human-only thing. This is only really for human ghosts and vampires.

It's a bit complicated; it's hard to say if, cryptoscientifically, they're actually 'species' of their own, due to the aforementioned factors; again, I know it sounds ridiculous to classify fucking GHOSTS as a different species, but the problem is that there are different kinds of ghosts and that's even just the human ones. And those need to be classified, at least to an extent. I'd say from an informal standpoint, to most people, these are theoretically just 'kinds' of 'humans', but that's because cryptosciences are insanely different than what orthoscientific[1] fields really cover and they don't have procedures in place for this shit. But documentation of this 'pseudoscience' has to start somewhere.

Taxonomically speaking, I'm gonna say my options to classify (turned human) vampires and (formerly-human) ghosts are as subspecies of humans, as a subgenus of the Homo genus, or as species in the Homo genus. Either way, we can assume this means they're in the genus Homo, and due to the need to further classify them, I'd possibly call them... "species"... but imagine I'm saying that through gritted teeth and squinting eyes to convey dubious legitimacy of my scientific study as expressed by my peers in the greater scientific community

We are also going to ignore the subspecies 'too different to just be the same species but not different enough that they can't reproduce so we can't consider them a separate species' stipulation. Again. I'll get into hybrids later. but they are great proof that when it comes to cryptians, 'similar enough to reproduce', does not apply in any meaningful way. plus theyre probably magic.

I may get every single Latin gender-tense word agreement wrong . brother i can barely speak italian in italy. but I'm trying ok. i tried looking it up also and didnt get much clarification

For human-turned-vampires, to put them as an adjacent species in the genus Homo, my instinct would be to call them Homo sanguinarius. What with the blood-drinking being the primary distinguishing factor of vampires and all. Kinda what defines the whole category, which I'd call sanguisuges or haematophages; the word 'vampire' is more common to describe the whole classification, but, like 'werewolf', it's actually probably best suited to describe just one species/subspecies denoting the traditional western Pop Culture Standard (PCS) vampire... those ones just got popular in media, so now all blood-drinkers are 'vampires'. Different kinds of sanguisuges with distinct enough traits from each other (PCS vampires, strigoi, possibly shtriga, lugat, etc.; I need to do more research) would be considered subspecies.

However, I consider even human-turned-vampires to be so different from humans enough so that I would have to consider them a Homo subgenus, Sanguinarius.

Consider a PCS vampire Sanguinarius publicaperceptius, "public perception" vampires; meanwhile, "traditional literary vampires" (Dracula) would be Sanguinarius draculus (I'd say there's a significant enough difference to separate the two in classification). DIO (Brando), Straizo and anyone else turned by the stone mask would be Sanguinarius saxeus, with saxeus referring to the stone mask. Sanguinarius infectiomorsibus, "infection fangs", could refer to a vampire turned by a bite, who can, presumably, turn someone else via a bite of their own. This is not the same as what saxeus vampires (or at least DIO) do, as the victims are less vampiric and more zombified. Pillar Men are not Sanguinarius saxeus. Pillar Men are something else.

As for human ghosts, I initially considered them as moreso a subspecies and called them Homo sapiens morsareliquarium (mors ("dead") and reliquum ("remnant") so "remnants of death") while normal humans would be Homo sapiens sapiens and Danny Phantom would be some third, more mysterious thing

But I changed my mind due to, again, the need to classify further, as well as feeling like it just didn't work right that way. and I only left that last paragraph in for the Danny Phantom joke, because comedy is actually the most important thing to me

Once I'd considered and decided against 'species', I started to tentatively go with subgenus (again).

I classified human ghosts as subgenus Morsareliquarium, and, naturally, all distinct types of ghosts (wraiths, spectres, yurei, onryo, etc.) would be species.

For example, an onryo, originating from Japanese folklore and described as a vengeful spirit who became a ghost because they had, in some way, been wronged in life, could be something like Morsareliquarium vindicta. A likely candidate for the classification Sugimoto Reimi falls under, whereas a more hostile typically-'vengeful' ghost, especially if not vindictive on their own behalf, might be something like Morsareliquarium invideo.

I needed someone to represent each mentioned subgenus of the Homo genus for this post and while I could have just gone with whichever three people came to mind first I remembered that there's one of each in La Squadra! So I put them in the silly little chart and this surely wont result in misfortune for me !

Illuso, Pesci, and Risotto Nero are a ghost, a human and a vampire respectively. Also, Pesci is the only human in the entire group and he's literally just a guy. he's so confused

Illuso is specifically a 'mirror ghost' ((which is popular enough to be a ghost trope but not specific enough to have a Wikipedia page or any specific non-individual examples (sorry Bloody Mary), so I gotta freestyle a little)), a ghost that can generally only manifest in reflections, specifically mirrors, for which I'll go with Morsareliquarium captispecula ('capti' (trapped) and 'speculum' (mirror), so "trapped in a mirror").

As for Risotto Nero... um... I'm not sure. It's really hard to study him on account of him being able to go invisible and also being incredibly dangerous. I know he's a vampire of some kind, but I don't know which kind. I've taken to just using Sanguinarius sanguinarius, to sort of indicate an unspecified sanguisuge. I'm still trying to study him but have been thusly unsuccessful in my attempts to infiltrate the group. oh well!

Look, I think vampire species should probably be its own separate post anyway. Maybe I'll be able to elaborate more on Risotto then!!

Oh and then theres zombies... it's complicated. Since zombies are generally just reanimated corpses, a lot of them don't really display a higher level of sentience, which can generally just be called "zombies" or "shamblers". Cadaverus is the term I'd use were I to apply a sub-genus to the category, although it's dubious. They do not fall under the umbrella of Morsareliquarium as they are, in general, corporeal undead, whilst ghosts are, in general, incorporeal undead.

There are a few kinds of zombies that have enough of a level of sentience and enough differentiation that they would be considered their own species; revenants, in particular, are a particular kind of zombie (Carne is an example) reanimated with the intention of just generally tormenting and/or harming the living, perhaps falling under the name Cadaverus malignitas.

A draugr is another kind of higher-sentience zombie; among the distinct abilities of various kinds of draugr, the main consistency is its contagiousness, as a draugr, much like a PCS zombie, is able to spread its draugrism, such as by biting. The main difference between an infectious shambler and a draugr is typically the presence of active sentience, as draugr tend to have at least some ability to cognitively think, as well as the ability to use a number of various magical abilities. Draugr could perhaps be described with Cadaverus transmissia.

Reanimated skeletons are also undead but are usually a magical construct or the result of possession of sorts. Generally, a walking talking skeleton (ambulossa) either falls under ghost or zombie category, or they are unsentient magical constructs.

Liches are undead as well, but fall moreso under the category of a human subspecies or a zombie; I would tentatively give them the name Cadaverus voluntarium, voluntary zombie.

They are typically a magic user (often but not always a necromancer) who made themself undead in a bid to achieve immortality, typically investing their immortality (their soul) into one or more objects or phylacteries ("anchors") in such that when the body is killed, the soul does not pass on, and thus the lich does not truly die. When a lich's anchor(s) are destroyed, their soul (or the part of the soul locked into the anchor) is returned to their physical body, after which the lich can be killed. A lich typically keeps a pretty close eye on their anchor or else hides it in a very very good hiding spot. An example would be Prosciutto. If he's anything to go by, it seems ghosts tend not to get along with liches. I think I can understand why a dead guy would be pretty spiteful of a guy who's cheating death.

Finally, for the record, mummies are not undead. Let me repeat that: mummies are not undead. They're not even cryptians. They don't move around. They're just dead. They're preserved corpses. Spooky zombie mummies are a complete fabrication of pop culture media. Still wouldn't recommend fucking with ancient tombs even if you don't give a shit about being respectful, because the bodies aren't moving anytime soon, but sphinxes sure are, and if they happen to be the tomb's guardian, as many remaining sphinxes may, you better hope you're real good at trick questions or you're fucked.

[1]: orthoscience is real-life actual science aka the opposite of pseudoscience. This is not a real-life, like, pre-existing, accepted or generally known word because I made it the fuck up for my own purposes and whatnot.

(( You can always ask me and/or my sona about my Monster AU and my/his notes! ))

Monster Taxonomy Page 1

Monster Taxonomy Page 1 Subsection A

[WIP]

Monster Taxonomy Page 3

[WIP]

((I've got a few things to say myself about what happened when trying to develop Monster AU Risotto, whom I labelled as a Dhampyr on something I drew a while before the original post of this. The dhampir originates in Balkan folklore, and from my research (I mostly just looked at Wikipedia for the general outline initially), it seems that it is the offspring of a human and a vampire; however, I was classifying them as a kind of vampire as they're the offspring of vampires with very specific traits, who don't seem to have a name distinct from "vampire", but don't quite fit the description of "traditional" vampires. So while technically a hybrid, this species' nomenclature would refer to the parent.

When I first made this post, Wikipedia... and absolutely no other source I could track down (the literal source listed on Wikipedia didn't mention this anywhere, I can't find any mythological resources that say this, and my Element Encyclopaedia of Magical Creatures doesn't even mention dhampirs, the bastards)...claimed what seems to set Dhampirs aside from normal vampires most prominently is that their blood is acidic to normal vampires and can melt any part of a vampire.

But... I was unable to back this detail up because I couldn't find any source that said this (like, not even the D&D sources, just, nothing. Which sucks because I was really hoping I could confirm this because I was thinking it would be so cool with Metallica's whole blood thing), so it appears to have been completely made up by some jackass editing the page. That detail has now been removed from the Wikipedia article since I brought up the lack of a source in the talk section. Remember to check the sources on more obscure Wikipedia articles.

There's also their supposed lack of bones (noodle moment) according to some areas, which apparently contributes to a typically short lifespan and a soft body. Small problem with that. Any being without bones can't be in the genus Homo because it's... an invertebrate. If we're to believe that specific interpretation that dhampirs have no bones... they are not in the Vertabrata subphylum. Even if they have a human parent.

You know where the actual problem lies here?

If he has no bones he doesn't belong on this post because he wouldn't be in the Homo genus. On account of not having bones.))

[enthusedbambi-jjba-au]

Monster AU - Monster Taxonomy [P2]

[P2: Human-Adjacent Species]

oh and please dont get me started on hybrids like . theyre like a whole different thing. ill get into it later its so complicated

First up, I want to try to start with species that are "adjacent" to humans; not just species that look very human, but species that more or less actually theoretically exist near humans taxonomically.

So this includes mostly just (some) turned "vampires" and "ghosts" (I'll get to lycanthropy later), and I know that sounds fucking ridiculous because I have just listed what most consider The Undead, Like, People Who Have Died and yeah. That's kinda the idea of them being human-adjacent because they... kind of are humans. Or they were human, once. Also, like lycanthropy, being fucking undead isn't necessarily a human-only thing. This is only really for human ghosts and vampires.

It's a bit complicated; it's hard to say if, cryptoscientifically, they're actually 'species' of their own, due to the aforementioned factors; again, I know it sounds ridiculous to classify fucking GHOSTS as a different species, but the problem is that there are different kinds of ghosts and that's even just the human ones. And those need to be classified, at least to an extent. I'd say from an informal standpoint, to most people, these are theoretically just 'kinds' of 'humans', but that's because cryptosciences are insanely different than what orthoscientific[1] fields really cover and they don't have procedures in place for this shit. But documentation of this 'pseudoscience' has to start somewhere.

Taxonomically speaking, I'm gonna say my options to classify (human-turned-) vampires and (formerly-human) ghosts are as subspecies of humans, as a subgenus of the Homo genus, or as species in the Homo genus. Either way, we can assume this means they're in the genus Homo, and due to the need to further classify them, I'd possibly call them... "species"... but imagine I'm saying that through gritted teeth and squinting eyes to convey dubious legitimacy of my scientific study as expressed by my peers in the greater scientific community

We are also going to ignore the subspecies 'too different to just be the same species but not different enough that they can't reproduce so we can't consider them a separate species' stipulation. Again. I'll get into hybrids later. but they are great proof that when it comes to cryptians, 'similar enough to reproduce', does not apply in any meaningful way. plus theyre probably magic.

For human-turned-vampires, to put them as an adjacent species in the genus Homo, my instinct would be to call them Homo sanguinarius. What with the blood-drinking being the primary distinguishing factor of vampires and all. Kinda what defines the whole category, which I'd call sanguisuges or haematophages; the word 'vampire' is more common to describe the whole classification, but, like 'werewolf', it's actually probably best suited to describe just one species/subspecies denoting the traditional western Pop Culture Standard (PCS) vampire... those ones just got popular in media, so now all blood-drinkers are 'vampires'. Different kinds of sanguisuges with distinct enough traits from each other (PCS vampires, strigoi, possibly shtriga, lugat, etc.; I need to do more research) would be considered subspecies.

However, I consider even human-turned-vampires to be so different from humans enough so that I would have to consider them a Homo subgenus, Sanguinarius.

Consider a PCS vampire Sanguinarius publicaperceptius, "public perception" vampires; meanwhile, "traditional literary vampires" (Dracula) would be Sanguinarius draculus (I'd say there's a significant enough difference to separate the two in classification). DIO (Brando), Straizo and anyone else turned by the stone mask would be Sanguinarius saxeus, with saxeus referring to the stone mask. Do NOT ask me how I know about that.

Sanguinarius infectiomorsibus, "infection fangs", could refer to a vampire turned by a bite, who can, presumably, turn someone else via a bite of their own. This is not the same as what saxeus vampires (or at least DIO) do, as the victims are less vampiric and more zombified. Pillar Men are not Sanguinarius saxeus. Pillar Men are something else. Again. Don't ask how I know about that.

As for human ghosts, I initially considered them as moreso a subspecies and called them Homo sapiens morsareliquarium (mors ("dead") and reliquum ("remnant") so "remnants of death") while normal humans would be Homo sapiens sapiens and Danny Phantom would be some third, more mysterious thing

But I changed my mind due to, again, the need to classify further, as well as feeling like it just didn't work right that way. and I only left that last paragraph in for the Danny Phantom joke (is that reference relevant yet?), because comedy is actually the most important thing to me

Once I'd considered and decided against 'species', I started to tentatively go with subgenus (again).

I classified human ghosts as subgenus Morsareliquarium, and, naturally, all distinct types of ghosts (wraiths, spectres, yurei, onryo, etc.) would be species.

For example, an onryo, originating from Japanese folklore and described as a vengeful spirit who became a ghost because they had, in some way, been wronged in life, could be something like Morsareliquarium vindicta. A likely candidate for the classification Sugimoto Reimi falls under, whereas a more hostile typically-'vengeful' ghost, especially if not vindictive on their own behalf, might be something like Morsareliquarium invideo.

I needed someone to represent each mentioned subgenus of the Homo genus for this post and while I could have just gone with whichever three people came to mind first I remembered that there's one of each in La Squadra! So I put a few quick drawings in the silly little chart and this surely wont result in misfortune for me !

(Illuso, Pesci, and Risotto Nero are a ghost, a human and a vampire respectively. Also, Pesci is the only human in the entire group and aside from his Stand he's literally just some guy)

Illuso is specifically a 'mirror ghost' ((which is popular enough to be a ghost trope but not specific enough to have a Wikipedia page or any specific non-individual examples (sorry Bloody Mary), so I gotta freestyle a little)), a ghost that can generally only manifest in reflections, specifically mirrors, for which I'll go with Morsareliquarium captispecula ('capti' (trapped) and 'speculum' (mirror), so "trapped in a mirror").

As for Risotto Nero... um... I'm not sure. It's really hard to study him on account of him being able to go invisible and also being incredibly dangerous. Anyways, I know he's a vampire/sanguisuge of some kind, but I don't know which kind. I've taken to just using Sanguinarius sanguinarius, to sort of indicate an unspecified sanguisuge. I'm still trying to study him but have been thusly unsuccessful in my attempts to infiltrate the group. I ougha publish my injury log at this point. I haven't even been here that long! oh well!

Look, I think vampire species should probably be its own separate post anyway. Maybe I'll be able to elaborate more on Risotto then!!

Oh and then theres zombies... it's complicated. Since zombies are generally just reanimated corpses, a lot of them don't really display a higher level of sentience, which can generally just be called "zombies" or "shamblers". Cadaverus is the term I'd use were I to apply a sub-genus to the category, although it's dubious. They do not fall under the umbrella of Morsareliquarium as they are, in general, corporeal undead, whilst ghosts are, in general, incorporeal undead.

There are a few kinds of zombies that have enough of a level of sentience and enough differentiation that they would be considered their own species; revenants, in particular, are a particular kind of zombie ((Carne is an example)) reanimated with the intention of just generally tormenting and/or harming the living, perhaps falling under the name Cadaverus malignitas.

A draugr is another kind of higher-sentience zombie; among the distinct abilities of various kinds of draugr, the main consistency is its contagiousness, as a draugr, much like a PCS zombie, is able to spread its draugrism, such as by biting. The main difference between an infectious shambler and a draugr is typically the presence of active sentience, as draugr tend to have at least some ability to cognitively think, as well as the ability to use a number of various magical abilities. Draugr could perhaps be described with Cadaverus transmissia.

Reanimated skeletons are also undead but are usually a magical construct or the result of possession of sorts. Generally, a walking talking skeleton (ambulossa) either falls under ghost or zombie category, or they are unsentient magical constructs.

Liches are undead as well, but fall moreso under the category of a human subspecies or a zombie; I would tentatively give them the name Cadaverus voluntarium, voluntary zombie.

They are typically a magic user (often but not always a necromancer) who made themself undead in a bid to achieve immortality, typically investing their immortality (their soul) into one or more objects or 'phylacteries'/amulets ("anchors") in such that when the body is killed, the soul does not pass on, and thus the lich does not truly die. When a lich's anchor(s) are destroyed, their soul (or the part of the soul locked into the anchor) is returned to their physical body, after which the lich can be killed. A lich typically keeps a pretty close eye on their anchor or else hides it in a very very good hiding spot. An example would be Prosciutto. If he's anything to go by, it seems ghosts tend not to get along with liches. I think I can understand why a dead guy would be pretty spiteful of a guy who's cheating death.

Finally, for the record, mummies are not undead. Let me repeat that: mummies are not undead. They're not even cryptians. They don't move around. They're just dead. They're preserved corpses. Spooky zombie mummies are a complete fabrication of pop culture media. Still wouldn't recommend fucking with ancient tombs even if you don't give a shit about being respectful, because the bodies aren't moving anytime soon, but sphinxes sure are, and if they happen to be the tomb's guardian, as many remaining sphinxes may, you better hope you're real good at trick questions or you're fucked.

[1]: orthoscience is "real" actual science aka the opposite of pseudoscience. This is not a real-life, like, pre-existing, accepted or generally known word because I made it the fuck up for my own purposes and whatnot.

Monster Taxonomy Page 1

Monster Taxonomy Page 1 Subsection A

Monster Taxonomy Page 3

[WIP]

((OOC: I've got a few things to say myself about what happened when trying to develop Monster AU Risotto, whom I labelled as a Dhampyr on something I drew a while before the original post of this. The dhampir originates in Balkan folklore, and from my research (I mostly just looked at Wikipedia for the general outline initially), it seems that it is the offspring of a human and a vampire; however, I was classifying them as a kind of vampire as they're the offspring of vampires with very specific traits, who don't seem to have a name distinct from "vampire", but don't quite fit the description of "traditional" vampires. So while technically a hybrid, this species' nomenclature would refer to the parent.

When I first made this post, Wikipedia... and absolutely no other source I could track down (the literal source listed on Wikipedia didn't mention this anywhere, I can't find any mythological resources that say this, and my Element Encyclopaedia of Magical Creatures doesn't even mention dhampirs, the bastards)...claimed what seems to set Dhampirs aside from normal vampires most prominently is that their blood is acidic to normal vampires and can melt any part of a vampire.

But... I was unable to back this detail up because I couldn't find any source that said this (like, not even the D&D sources, just, nothing. Which sucks because I was really hoping I could confirm this because I was thinking it would be so cool with Metallica's whole blood thing), so it appears to have been completely made up by some jackass editing the page. That detail has now been removed from the Wikipedia article since I brought up the lack of a source in the talk section. Remember to check the sources on more obscure Wikipedia articles.

There's also their supposed lack of bones (noodle moment) according to some areas, which apparently contributes to a typically short lifespan and a soft body. Small problem with that. Any being without bones can't be in the genus Homo because it's... an invertebrate. If we're to believe that specific interpretation that dhampirs have no bones... they are not in the Vertabrata subphylum. Even if they have a human parent.

You know where the actual problem lies here?

If he has no bones he doesn't belong on this post because he wouldn't be in the Homo genus. On account of not having bones.))

[snowlithills]

Theses on Monsters, China Mieville

1.

The history of all hitherto-existing societies is the history of monsters. Homo sapiens is a bringer-forth of monsters as reason’s dream. They are not pathologies but symptoms, diagnoses, glories, games, and terrors.

2.

To insist that an element of the impossible and fantastic is a sine qua non of monstrousness is not mere nerd hankering (though it is that too). Monsters must be creature forms and corpuscles of the unknowable, the bad numinous. A monster is somaticized sublime, delegate from a baleful pleroma. The telos of monstrous quiddity is godhead.

3.

There is a countervailing tendency in the monstrous corpus. It is evident in Pokémon’s injunction to “catch ’em all,” in the Monster Manual’s exhaustive taxonomies, in Hollywood’s fetishized “Monster Shot.” A thing so evasive of categories provokes—and surrenders to—ravenous desire for specificity, for an itemization of its impossible body, for a genealogy, for an illustration. The telos of monstrous quiddity is specimen.

4.

Ghosts are not monsters.

5.

It is pointed out, regularly and endlessly, that the word “monster” shares roots with “monstrum,” “monstrare,” “monere“—”that which teaches,” “to show,” “to warn.” This is true but no longer of any help at all, if it ever was.

6.

Epochs throw up the monsters they need. History can be written of monsters, and in them. We experience the conjunctions of certain werewolves and crisis-gnawed feudalism, of Cthulhu and rupturing modernity, of Frankenstein’s and Moreau’s made things and a variably troubled Enlightenment, of vampires and tediously everything, of zombies and mummies and aliens and golems/robots/clockwork constructs and their own anxieties. We pass also through the endless shifts of such monstrous germs and antigens into new wounds. All our moments are monstrous moments.

7.

Monsters demand decoding, but to be worthy of their own monstrosity, they avoid final capitulation to that demand. Monsters mean something, and/but they mean everything, and/but they are themselves and irreducible. They are too concretely fanged, toothed, scaled, fire-breathing, on the one hand, and too doorlike, polysemic, fecund, rebuking of closure, on the other, merely to signify, let alone to signify one thing.

Any bugbear that can be completely parsed was never a monster, but some rubber-mask-wearing Scooby-Doo villain, a semiotic banality in fatuous disguise. It is a solution without a problem.

8.

Our sympathy for the monster is notorious. We weep for King Kong and the Creature from the Black Lagoon, no matter what they’ve done. We root for Lucifer and ache for Grendel.

It is a trace of skepticism that the given order is a desideratum that lies behind our tears for its antagonists, our troubled empathy with the invader of Hrothgar’s hall.

9.

Such sympathy for the monster is a known factor, a small problem, a minor complication for those who, in drab reaction, deploy an accusation of monstrousness against designated social enemies.

10.

When those same powers who enmonster their scapegoats reach a tipping point, a critical mass, of political ire, they abruptly and with bullying swagger enmonster themselves. The shock troops of reaction embrace their own supposed monstrousness. (From this investment emerged, for example, the Nazi Werwolf program.) Such are by far more dreadful than any monster because, their own aggrandizements notwithstanding, they are not monsters. They are more banal and more evil.

11.

The saw that We Have Seen the Real Monsters and They Are Us is neither revelation, nor clever, nor interesting, nor true. It is a betrayal of the monstrous, and of humanity.

[iamthekaijuking]

The new 2022 Flying Wyvern tree, with much more in depth explanations for the families and an overview for every monster (this is a very long post). Some things had to be chosen or ignored due to the inconsistent nature of monster designs and wing anatomy. Links to the previous version and first pencil and paper tree.

The Common Ancestor

My hypothesized ancestor of flying wyverns and likely even most bird wyverns (or was at least closely related to it) would have been a small paravian dinosaur. This creature, related to troodontids, dromeosaurs, and birds, would have been fully feathered and likely very similar to its relatives save for its arms. The arms of this creature would have been a little more like those of Scansoriopterygids, with a styliform supporting a membrane, but with shorter, more robust hands like those of larger theropods and a little more flexibility in the forearm and wrist region. These adaptations would have allowed it to occasionally walk on all fours in a somewhat pterosaur-like gait or tigrex-like gait, and allowed it to climb trees and even burrow somewhat. This small jack of all stats creature would be one of the few dinosaur families to survive the KT extinction event (yes I think the same extinction events that happened irl happened in monhun), and would be destined for greatness. In later descendants many would lose the gastralia and have a proper waist, and the styliform would gain joints and even duplicate, forming false fingers in addition to the three true fingers. So I will be referring to the styliforms as “Pseudophalanges”.

The God Wyverns

Early on in the evolutionary history of flying wyverns after the KT extinction there was a split between flying wyverns that stayed somewhat small and able to climb and glide, and flying wyverns that became entirely land dwelling and fully quadrupedal. These entirely ground dwelling wyverns eventually became the family of long lived, massive, and powerful wyverns we know today as the god wyverns. These animals are so powerful that most elder dragons avoid them and some were mistaken as dragons as well. It was likely that they were more numerous in the past, but today there are only six genre alive.

The origin Wyvern: One of the most ancient flying wyverns, it shared a common ancestor with modern day god wyverns, but is a long since extinct species only known from sparse remains. What it looked like isn’t something scientists are 100% certain on, but it likely had many features in common with prehistoric and anatomically primitive wyverns like tigrex, Wyvern rex, and akantor.

Akantor: One of the most primitive flying wyverns species still alive in modern day. The species are held in reverence and fear by people who live close to akantor territory, and they are even called the “Infernal Black Gods”. It’s easy to see how these volcanic apex predators earn their reputation, but interestingly they have articulate spines on their back. This anti predator defense implies that in the recent past there was larger predators that preyed on akantor. What exactly these predators were are unknown, but likely were either powerful elder dragons such as black dragons or dalamadur, larger god wyverns, or massive tyrannosaur brute wyverns related to the owner of the massive skull in the Jurassic frontier.

Ukanlos and the Sand/Mountain wyvern: These are two very closely related wyverns, possibly even being in the same genus and having diverged from each other after the end of the most recent ice age. Both have very similar craniums and are adapted to deserts, albeit ones of vastly different temperatures. Ukanlos is adapted to polar regions and is even semi aquatic, using its large fat stores and extensive avian respiratory system to remain buoyant and carving through ice sheets with its jagged shell. The Sand Wyvern is adapted to the harsh equatorial deserts and is more lean and combats heat exhaustion via two organs protruding from its back, possibly being able to flush with blood like many primitive wyverns like akantor and tigrex. We have never faced a Sand Wyvern in any of the games.

Odibatorasu: A god wyvern with an extensive shell and chin like the aforementioned Ukanlos and Sand wyvern, and might even be related to them. To avoid competition with the sand wyvern, Odibas are durophages. Interestingly, they have modified their avian respiratory system by using some of the air sacks in their back to launch sand from the front of their shells like a canon. This is not the only time a flying wyvern has repurposed air sacks. Reports of this monster are greatly exaggerated, as is usual for any report given by a Mezeporta hunter. Hunters from Mezeporta have been a constant thorn in the side of the scientific community, as they seem to prioritize being seen as superhuman legends that regularly kill supernatural gods than being protectors of villages and scientific assistants. So far they have not been found guilty of illegal hunting activity, but the hunters guild is searching for any excuse to send Guild Knights after them.

Keoaruboru: A very poorly known god wyvern. So little is known about it that the guild still has it classified as an elder dragon, although its forearms betray its ancestry. Not much else can be said due to a lack of reliable information as they have only been encountered by Mezeporta hunters.

Bogabadorumu: Another poorly known god wyvern. It has modified its air sacks to spew explosive gas out from vents, not unlike magnamalo. Some individuals have 4 fingers, and the presence of four fingers on a maniraptorian is odd, but it is because of a mutation that sometimes occurs in quadrupedal wyverns. Some god wyverns and “pseudowyverns” are born with a second first digit, and in many cases this digit is so small it doesn’t even touch the ground.

Wyvern Rex and the Tigrex/Barioth Family

The other side of the first big split in the flying wyvern family, these wyverns that were able to climb and glide eventually became larger fully ground dwelling creatures just like the god wyverns, but didn’t grow as large as the god wyverns and kept their large Pseudophalanges and wing membranes.

Wyvern Rex: One of the earliest known member of this family and just like the origin wyvern it was already quite anatomically distinct from its more bird-like ancestors, indicating that there are gaps in the fossil record for flying wyverns.

Pariapuria: This wyvern is quite unusual and split off early in comparison to its non-god wyvern relatives. Parias are semi-aquatic and seem to have stayed that way for a large portion of their evolutionary history, and even evolved semi permeable skin covered in mucus in between their scales. They also have very strange and violent digestive systems and a unique way of processing poisons. Instead of using their liver they seem to be able to separate poisons from food in their stomach and then vomit them back up. This has resulted in their livers becoming smaller over time.

Tigrex: One of the most famous wyverns, the appearance of the nomadic tigrex has changed little over its evolutionary history. It’s behavior, size, and internal anatomy has though. Its ancestors likely weren’t as large or nomadic, and could have even been slightly feathered like many related pseudowyverns. Tigrex has also evolved a highly specialized larynx and syrinx in order to create and withstand their iconic calls, and their trachea loops far back into their body in order to provide enough space for their calls to resonate like whooping cranes. The calls of this wyvern, and other extremely loud monsters like Akantor, can actually cause hearing and internal organ damage in humans, and in some cases even hit the once hypothesized “brown note”; a sound frequency that makes a human lose control of their bowels.

Diorekkusu: A Wyvern genus very closely related to tigrex, “Diorex” are quite distinct in their anatomy and native range. Unlike tigrex, Diorex are only found in the great forest and have very weak shells with little in the way of pigmentation. Instead they protect themselves with electrical organs and ores they attach to their bodies via electromagnetism. As expected of Mezeporta hunters, recounts of this monster are unreliable.

Dyuragaua: These wyverns are distinct for their odd colorations and cryogenic abilities. Their colors are thought to be a warning against predators due to their toxins that induce sleep.

Mi Ru: Very little is known about these wyverns. Due to the fact they’re only found near the Tower (a megastructure built by the ancient civilization out of Kushala Daoras) and that they have shape shifting abilities, some scientists think they might have been modified from a now extinct Dyuragaua relative, although this has not been accepted by the larger scientific community. Despite the appearance of Mi Ru and Dyuragaua, they are actually closer related to Barioths than they are to Tigrex (although still closely related) due to their convergently more mammalian facial features and that Mi Ru has pinnae derived from cartilaginous skin extensions around the ear like Barioth.

Hyujikiki: A sister genus to Barioth, these fully feathered wyverns do not occupy an apex predator status in the areas where they live and have toxic quills as an anti-predator defense. They have a zigzagged tooth line containing tusks, not unlike their closest relative. Despite what Mezeporta hunters say, they do not instantly regrow spines, but they are occasionally launched at attackers.

Barioth: Apex predators of polar and desert regions, Barioths are expert climbers despite their size thanks to studs on their paws and Pseudophalanges. They have a single pair of tusks dominating their face and few other teeth. Barioth are organ and fat specialists who store oils from their food in their spiraling crop which are then spewed at opponents in a spinning gust of air. In polar individuals these oils instantly freeze in the cold air.

Magnamalo: An aberrant member of the Barioth/Hyujikiki group, these creatures are still misidentified as fanged wyverns by the guild. Magnamalo are heavily adapted for cursorial movement and normally hold their arms in an erect position as opposed to the sprawling arms of its relatives. They have lost their wing membranes and have repurposed their Pseudophalanges into swords. Magnamalo also have erectable spines and articulate spade-like thagomizers. These are extensive anti-predator defenses, although their violent life style wears these down, and old individuals can be identified by their unique scars and spine and shell wear. Males have elaborate horns and without them they cannot gain the attention of female individuals. Just like Hyujikiki and Barioths, magnamalo have tusks, however in magnamalo these are multicusped and can fold backwards like fangs. These tusks are for ripping out the throats of prey before folding back into protective grooves so that the anterior cusps can be used as normal canines. Magnamalo have dramatically repurposed many of their avian air sacks into various canals going across their bodies to specialized vent pores, and their large humpback houses a “holding cell” air sack. This extremely derived and separated portion of their respiratory system houses their hellfire, which is a mix of gasses extracted from their digestive system and the highly volatile chemical nitrogen triiodide. Their hellfire is kept from exploding inside their bodies thanks to vacuums and internal pressure, although in old individuals their vent pores are weaker and attacking them can cause the hellfire to go off in their canals.

Nargacuga and the evolution of Flying Wyverns with multiple Pseudophalanges

Another family of the non-god flying wyverns that adapted for life on the ground, these flying wyverns distinguished themselves from the tigrex/barioth line by duplicating their Pseudophalanges, and in many later groups these would form fully functional wings along with the fingers of the hand. After Nargacuga, members of this family are overwhelmingly bipedal.

Nargacuga: The most basal living member of the multi-pseudophalanges flying wyvern family, these feathered wyverns are notable for their Pseudophalanges and tail adaptations. Being animals that live in dense forested environments, Nargacugas have turned their Pseudophalanges into sharp biomineralized blades that can cut through underbrush and create game trails. Nargacugas have also turned their tails into powerful weapons. Their tail vertebrae are loosely connected and have nerves not unlike those in the mouths of baleen whales, able to stretch and snap back in place like elastic. Their tail feathers are also stiff and mineralized, and can be raised and even flung at attackers. Interestingly, both new world and Lucent nargs can secrete a debilitating compound onto their tails. It is likely that the ancestral Nargacuga could secrete poison and that this was retained in lucent nargs and turned into anticoagulants in the new world species, and that old world nargacugas only recently lost their ability to secrete toxins.

Pukei, Paolumu, and the cave wyverns

Many members of this family of flying wyverns may seem unrelated, but are linked together by crucial anatomical features that some members have lost in their evolution. The common ancestor of this family was a brood parasite with a cloaca on the tip of its tail, a more muscular face than most wyverns, and a more extensive respiratory system with air sacks in its neck. Many members of this family have also incorporated their digits into their wings. This family grouping was influenced by @glavenychus’s own theory.

Pukei-Pukei: Odd new world wyverns initially thought of as bird wyverns, but are in reality flying wyverns. Pukei have lost the more muscular face of their ancestors, but are still brood parasites and have evolved arboreal and frugivorous adaptations. Interestingly, the colon of pukeis can retain poison from their diets or suck up liquids (depending on the species) and spray it at attackers in a mist or pressurized blast.

Paolumu: Unusual new world wyverns that look like massive bats. They have abandoned brood parasitism and their cloaca is located back at the base of their tail, but they have gone all out with their neck sacks and face muscles. Their muscles on their face allow for more precise suction feeding (as they feed on the floating eggs of terrestrial coral) and the air sacks in their neck can actually inflate with air and lighter than air gases to allow it to float and save on energy expenditure when flying.

Scale bats: Perhaps the smallest of the flying wyverns, they share common ancestry with the cave wyverns, but curiously have lost all three defining features of the cave wyvern/Pukei/Paolumu group. However it is not unusual for a member of a family to lose what defines it during evolution.

Khezu: The most common and most basal of the cave wyverns we know of. These creepy and sluggish wyverns show many of the adaptations that cave wyverns have. Non-ossified neck vertebrae, strong smell, vibration sensitivity (which are detected by small specialized feathers across the body), carbon dioxide detection, suckers on the ends of digits, slow metabolism, and wet moist skin. Khezu itself has large fat stores that fuel its electrical abilities. The third digits of their hands have also fused with their first Pseudophilanges. Khezu retains a muscular face and the air sacks in its neck are complex and can inflate to extend its neck towards prey. Khezu has also taken the final step in reproductive parasitism and have become parasitoids, shocking prey to stun them and implanting young into the victim through its toothy sucker-like cloaca, or dumping young on carcasses. Because cave wyverns likely will never run into another individual of their species, they reproduce via parthenogenesis.

Gigginox: Flying wyverns who have adapted into even stranger forms. Few bones in their body are ossified and as such they have reverted back into quadrupedal creatures to better support their weight. All three of their fingers make contact with the ground. Their quadratojugal and quadrate have become an extra jaw joint and another joint has developed between the surangular and prearticular and the dentaries and splenial. This gives gigginox three places for jaw articulation and allows them to make incredible gapes. They also lack any true teeth, and instead have keratin spikes lining their lips. Gigginox have also turned their entire undersides into something akin to the pads on gecko feet, allowing them to cling to walls and ceilings with ease. Gigginox have parental investment, and adult individuals often have several highly neotenous young living inside their vagina, which they feed through shedding specialized nutrient rich layers of the vaginal wall.

Qurio: Aberrant even by cave wyvern standards, these paraves have been so altered by the forces of evolution that they seemingly have abandoned conventional tetrapod anatomy. Qurio are also incredibly neotenic, to the point of being fetal, and seem to be social giggi capable of flight for all intents and purposes. They likely share a common ancestor with gigginox, but then adapted to the extensive worldwide cave network dug out by subterranean monsters before becoming parasites of elder dragons and then becoming symbiotes of the incredibly basal true elder dragon Gaismagorm. Qurio secrete compounds that allow them to calm or even appear invisible to elder dragon immune systems. They also have an endogenous virus that causes infected monsters to hemorrhage. Qurio often try to give nutrients to their primary host, and this backwash (aside from containing diseases) also contains blast ailment components, explaining how Gaismagorm has access to blast and the explosion “risen” elders create when reaching a risen state. They normally are not as active as seen on the surface, which was caused by the stress of being separated from their main host in a new environment. Qurio seem to be evolving towards eusociality, as certain Qurio in a colony specialize for different tasks, such as procuring food and being eaten by Gaisma after their first outing, to nuptial individuals who start new colonies.

Seregios, Legiana, Yurosus, and the evolution of excessive Pseudophalanges

One radiation of bipedal flying wyverns would take their Pseudophalanges to the next level, and actually lose some of their true fingers as they were no longer needed. Be it through evolving an overabundance of them, or evolving excessive joints on some to produce whips, these very aerially capable predators are defined by their unusual styliform adaptations.

Astalos: While an unusual Wyvern on it’s own, it isn’t immediately obvious how astalos qualifies for this family. This is partly because it has evolved more towards a more traditional bipedal flying wyvern appearance while also having unusual insectoid traits that distract from its odd hand anatomy. Surprisingly, many anatomical features suggest Seregios is actually the closest living relative of Astalos, despite what the flawed ramblings of the guild might say. Such odd anatomical similarities are a jointed crest, occasional quadrupedal tendencies (although obligate in Seregios), forked tails, the loss of the first finger (Seregios having evolved a palm spur to compensate for this loss), and a wing supported entirely by the Pseudophalanges with the leading one being quite robust. Astalos itself has many unusual characteristics. The feet of astalos have very large third toes while digits two and four are rather small, indicating that astalos could be evolving towards a foot configuration like that of an ostrich in order to run faster on the ground. Muscles in its crest, wrists, and tail are also rich in quartz crystals and have uniquely coiled DNA, and by rhythmic flexing astalos is able to take advantage of piezoelectricity. Astalos’s blood is rich in biliverdin, giving its flesh an unusual green color and bad taste. The insect-like appearance of this flying wyvern might also be an extremely unusual case of “you are what you eat”. Many large insects make up a sizable portion of astalos’s diet, particularly in its infancy, and it could be that the species might have picked up insect genes after fighting off an ancient virus that jumped from their food to them.

Seregios: Unusual desert dwellers with adaptations for nest raiding and predation of mesopredators in its environment. Seregios is linked to astalos by the aforementioned traits, but has many unique adaptations itself. The scales that cover seregios can be articulated so that they’re flat against the body for aerodynamic purposes or raised up in a threat display. These scales are jagged, brittle, and loosely connected to the body, allowing them to rattle against each other to intimidate rivals, cut anything trying to attack them, or even be flung at attackers. Any scales that break on attackers may leave small pieces embedded in wounds. The feet of seregios ore zygodactyl and both strong and flexible, and like an owl they are the primary way seregios dispatches prey. However, these adaptations for dexterity come at the cost of being able to fully support seregios’s weight, and so seregios also uses its wings when walking on the ground (unless it is running). The two existing fingers on their hands are small and recurved, indicating that they are primarily climbing instruments. The wings of seregios have four Pseudophalanges in total, one more than astalos, and these wings give seregios incredible maneuverability in the air. Both astalos and seregios’s aerial capabilities rival those of rathalos. During the frenzy virus outbreak several thousand seregios were seen fleeing from an unknown area in the desert occupied at the time by an individual infected with the virus. This area was possibly a nesting ground. Like many birds, seregios might have a communal nesting ground they return to every year in mass to raise young. If the infected individual attacked others in the nesting site and caused all the members to leave, then that individual likely caused the breeding year for that colony, if not the whole species, to fail.

Legiana: A flying wyvern with unique wing anatomy, legiana operates much like a supersized falcon. The wings of legiana are supported by four Pseudophalanges, and the only true finger left is the thumb. These Pseudophalanges aren’t actually joined by a membrane and instead support large lobes of skin that overlap with each other and give it slotted wings. This set up decreases drag and increases thrust. The hip and horn membranes also increase its surface area and allow it to ride updrafts and thermals. Indeed, legiana could potentially be the single most aerially capable flying wyvern. The feet of legiana are unique in that they’re designed for taking out other volant animals on the wing, with their massive talons and slim toes and legs. Legiana also have teeth near the rear of their mouth that resemble the tomial of falcons. This is an adaptation for snapping the neck or crushing the skull of small and difficult prey. Legiana is over-equipped to take down the raphinos in their environment, and this is likely because they ate more, larger prey in the recent past, and that these are now extinct and legiana survived by being generalists when it came to their prey choices.

Zenaserisu: These wyverns are part of a radiation that lost their third fingers or fused them to their second fingers and hypertrophied their first pseudophalange, giving it several joints and claws. These tassels trail behind the body and are good indicators of fitness while also functioning as whips. Zenaserisu itself seems to eat small animals and fish, tracking the movement of small terrestrial prey with its ears and pursuing fish with its webbed toes and fluked tail. It then incapacitates prey with a pressurized blast of water from its crop. Zenaserisu is likely just now evolving into a more aquatic lifestyle. Hunting records of this parave have been exaggerated by Mezeporta hunters.

Berukyurosu & Doragyurosu: Sister species of one another that live in canyons and elevated habitats, these seldom seen wyverns are contenders for the smartest wyverns and are known for outsmarting hunters and changing tactics on the spot, showing that they have advanced problem solving skills and can strategize and plan ahead. Berukyurosu itself has electricity generating cells and unique insulatory tissues. Doragyurosu has dragon element, suggesting a lifestyle necessitating a strong immune system; possibly switching to obligate scavenging in times of scarcity. Most information we have to go off of these wyverns is unfortunately from the hunting reports of Mezeporta hunters, and is thus somewhat unreliable.

Poborubarumu, Diablos, Raths & and the evolution of hard shelled flying wyverns

A sister family of wyverns to the seregios/doragyurosu family, these wyverns are defined by their tough shells, wing structure, and ancestrally toxic and flame based abilities as well as metabolism control, although many members have secondarily lost some of these features. The ancestral member of this family had a tough spiny shell, cranial ornaments, fire breath, defensive toxins, “mandible” crests, thagomizers, control over its metabolism, three pseudophalanges, and the second and third fingers forming the leading edge of the wing (which would either fuse together or come back to join the thumb in making a proper hand in its many descendants). Interestingly, the raths and espinas genus are rather close in appearance to this ancestor.

Poborubarumu: This cetacean-like wyvern split off from the rest of its family quite early and has reverted back to a pseudowyvern body plan. Competition with a now extinct aerial competitor forced the ancestors of Poborus into a fully terrestrial lifestyle, and from there they became apex predators of the highland. Growing so large and front heavy that their second and third fingers reverted back into non-wing bearing digits in order to join the thumbs in bearing the immense bulk of this parave, and losing a pair of their now vestigial pseudophalanges. So large is it that the guild thought this species was another god wyvern upon its initial discovery. The unusual mouth and tooth rows of Poborubarumu are built so that any prey they ambush cannot escape and is swallowed whole. This wyvern incapacitates prey by using its specialized air sacks. In the evolutionary history of Poborus they modified the air sacks in their respiratory system to create a variety of sounds for long range communication; turning their whole body into a bagpipe of sorts. Today this is also used to disorient and even kill prey, as the loud sounds burst ear drums and the vibrations rip internal organs. These constant vocalizations are responsible for the more outlandish claims hunters make when recounting their experiences with the reptiles, as the frequencies can cause humans to hallucinate. They may sometimes even reach the “brown note” frequency. The presence of a fluked tail and symbiotic barnacles imply Poborubarumu were semi aquatic and lived along coastlines in their recent evolutionary history.

Espinas: Basal shelled wyverns who live life in the slow lane, they are defined by their spiny appearance and toxicity. Espinas have wings of similar structure to raths, with a wing supported by three pseudophalanges and digits two and three which have fused like in the distantly related aves. The thumbs are free and blend in with the various spurs on the leading edge of the second digit, which could potentially be modified from the flight feathers that attached to the finger in their distant ancestors. Espinas is the shelled wyvern equivalent of a bear; eating a wide variety of animals, carrion, and flora and spending a lot of time sleeping while their large guts process their meals. In emergencies though they can accelerate their metabolism and flush various body parts with blood to aid in oxygenation. Espinas also emit two toxins, but only one of them is one they produce themselves. The other is stolen from the various carapaceons, frogs, and plants they eat.

Meraginasu: Close relatives of espinas who may even be within the same genus. These wyverns have adapted to live both on the surface and in the extensive cave systems dug out by ancient subterranean monsters. They were thought to be extinct but were recently discovered alive and well.

Karagumosu: This extinct shelled flying wyvern shares ancestry with gravios and monoblos line wyverns, and has many of the hallmark adaptations of the subgroup. Loss of flight, wings supported only by pseudophalanges while the fingers are used for digging, horns, a diet mostly consisting of plants and minerals, and tough biomineralized shells.

Gravios: Wyverns with some of the toughest shells and slowest metabolisms, these paraves go through an ontogenetic niche shift as they grow from basarios to gravios. Juveniles spend decades eating plants, animals, and dirt to carefully grow their gut biome. If they survive long enough to complete this they migrate to volcanic regions as their body changes to a gravios, and for the rest of their life they will subsist mostly off the waste products their gut microbes produce as they slowly break down minerals the gravios ingests. Their shells are the most biomineralized of any wyvern and most of their poisons are derived from the plants they eat. Different diets result in slightly different shell composition. The third finger is the leading edge of the wing in this genus, and the membrane is supported by two pseudophalanges. Interestingly, some individuals around the kamura region have a mutation giving them an extra pseudophalange.

Gureadomosu: A poorly researched sister genus to gravios, these desert dwelling wyverns include more plants in their diet than their relative. They reside in underground waterways where they have a steady supply of minerals and plants, but when these dry up or they need to leave, Gureadomusu can suck up water into many of their air sacks to use as an internal reservoir as they travel to new feeding grounds. Records of this monster are unfortunately mostly from Mezeporta hunters.

Monoblos: An iconic species that is unfortunately the target of many illegal or cultural trophy hunts. These violent wyverns can tackle almost any plant in the desert thanks to their tough beak and teeth batteries. They use their hands to dig elaborate tunnels across their territory so they can travel great distances away from the heat of the sun, and their highly vascular wing membranes allow them to shed excess heat. The hump on their back anchors many powerful neck and wing muscles that make facing this wyvern a death sentence.

Varusaborosu: Not much is known about this elusive, fire breathing, volcanic blos wyvern, other than their penchant for meat, minerals, and a cactus species with high caloric content. Their low population size might be due to decreasing numbers of this special cactus, and Varusaborosu may be on its way to extinction. Many of the air sacks of this species have been adapted into combustion chambers, and when angry, purple flames spew from vents across their bodies. This serves to make incredibly intimidating displays and burn attackers, but also burns the wyverns themselves. It’s unknown if this species or monoblos are the closest living relatives to diablos. Accounts of the behavior of these wyverns is mostly from Mezeporta hunters, and so is exaggerated.

Diablos: A blos wyvern nearly as iconic as their single horned relatives, diablos are cactus specialist. Due to their more restricted diets in such harsh environments, they have heavily competitive lives and often engage in physical ritualistic combat as opposed to the display based competitions of monoblos. Not even mated diablos are spared from this hostility as males must leave the female’s territory after mating or she will make him. Females spend their entire pregnancy surging with testosterone and other hormones, which gives them their iconic black color. Diablos lay eggs and so must steadily give their embryos these crucial hormones over the course of the pregnancy and cannot give the young a last minute hormone dump like live bearing animals. Some individuals huff smoke when angry, indicating that the species has a vestigial flame sack.

Gurenzeburu: This dangerous shelled wyvern of the highlands is one of uncertain taxonomic affinity. Whether or not it is a basal rath or blos line shelled wyvern is unclear, but current evidence supports the rath hypothesis. Physical features that define this wyvern is an unusual pubic bone, loss of a pair of pseudophalanges, and a tail similar to that of rath wyverns.

Anorupatisu: Another shelled wyvern of unknown affinity but currently thought to be the closest living relative of Gurenzeburu due to the singular large nasal horn, exposed teeth, and loss of pseudophalanges (in the case of anorupatisu it has lost all of them). Some records of it are highly exaggerated. These are from the obvious Mezeporta culprits.

Canopus: Little is known about this recently extinct shelled wyvern but from the incomplete fossil remains it seems to have been a strange rath relative. It did not go extinct for the reasons the guild says, as that’s not how evolution works.

Bazelgeuse: The largest volant flying wyvern known, this shelled wyvern has abandoned tough shells in favor of the production of a highly explosive chemical that is secreted from its underside and a life lived primarily on the wing. Bazelgeuse are obligate scavengers and are found anywhere in the world where thermals can be ridden (with the exception of individuals that become trapped in the frost isles). Bazel is very closely related to raths, and has a similar wing set up and a tail thagomizer. Bazel wings are composed of a free thumb, digits two and three fused together and forming the leading edge of the wing, and three pseudophalanges that were only visible upon dissection as well as cartilaginous rods. These wings are proportionately more like the active soaring wings of many seabirds, as opposed to the more elliptical wings of raths. Bazelgeuse can alter the speed of their metabolism depending on the situation, just like espinas. Eldest individuals are known as seething bazelgeuse.

The Raths: The flying wyvern, this fire breathing genus is extremely adaptable and widespread, boasting a worldwide distribution. These Kings of the Skies and Queens of the Land have captured the imagination of cultures everywhere. Raths have distinct sexual dimorphism and different hunting strategies between the sexes. The female rathians are green and spend more time on the ground, and have defensive feather derived quills on her tail and shoulders. The red males spend more time in the air and have larger mandible crests and thagomizers. Raths produce venom, which is delivered through the claws in males and the tail quills in females. While it’s agreed that venom production is ancestral to shelled wyverns, it is also entirely possible that venom convergently evolved in the group multiple times. The wings of raths are much like those of bazelgeuse and espinas; a free thumb and fused second and third fingers (and in some populations both still grow claws) forming the leading edge of the wing, which is further supported by three pseudophalanges. The wings of raths are elliptical, which allows for their aerial maneuverability and high speed in short bursts at the cost of needing to be constantly flapped to stay airborne. There are three recognized “species” living across the world (new world, old world, and Val Harbar), and each has its own pink/blue and gold/silver “subspecies”. Whether or not these are actually different species or regional variants and color morphs is the subject of intense academic debate, as while the numerous subspecies rarely breed outside their own kind (greens of Val Harbar only only mate with reds of Val Harbar, blues of the new world only mate with pinks of the new world, etc) they have occasionally interbred and produced viable offspring. It is highly likely that the Raths collectively form a species complex. Single nesting rathian might slow her metabolism down when guarding eggs to better preserve energy in an environment with less prey and to lessen the amount of times she needs to leave the nest, as eggs and hatchlings can be easily preyed upon and in desert regions seregios is often the perpetrator.

Zerureusu: A poorly researched sister genus to the raths, but its widely agreed that the more fantastical events that happen in the stories of the few who have fought it were likely illusions brought upon by the bright flashes of light it produces, and the exaggerated stories of Mezeporta hunters. It’s likely both male and females display the male phenotype.

Unknown Black Flying Wyvern: Another sister genus to the raths whose abilities have been exaggerated and possibly hallucinated by the Mezeporta hunters who have hunted it due to intense fear and envenomation. The few individuals found resemble black rathians with red extremities and rathalos-like tails.

Halks, Remobra, & Wing Drakes

While technically shelled wyverns, these smaller flying wyverns collectively known as wing drakes have lost their extensive armor and large size as adaptations for social life, flocking behavior, communal nesting, and less carnivorous lifestyles. It’s unknown if wing drakes evolved small size on their own or if the common ancestor of wing drakes and raths was a small mesopredator and raths re-evolved large size.

Halks: Wing drakes with a resemblance to the closely related raths, there is no longer wild halks as the species has been domesticated since the fall of the ancient civilization or perhaps even before. Much like kinsects (although not as drastic as them) halks have a variety of different phenotypes that can be activated upon eating certain foods. This activation of genes in response to environmental conditions is called epigenetics. It’s possible that this was an adaptation that allowed halks to live in any environment, and that this was taken advantage of as they were domesticated. But there are others who theorize that like Mi Ru and kinsects, the halks are genetically modified organisms. The wings of halks are like those of raths, but with one less pseudophalange.

Remobra: Wing drakes erroneously classified as snake wyverns by guild quacks due to their superficial snake like appearance. Remobra are viewed by many cultures as bad omens due to their habit of following elder dragons and scavenging off their kills. The wing anatomy of remobra is like that of halks, but their proportionately massive wings have vestigial pseudophalanges. The massive wings of remobra and the related bazelgeuse has sparked theories as to if the ancestor of bazels, raths, and wing drakes had massive wings for riding thermals. The closest living relative of remobra lives in the new world, while remobra itself can only be found in the old world. It’s possible that its recent ancestors lived in the new world but rode thermals or the backs of massive migrating elder dragons like Zorah or dalamadur to the old world or migrated through the worldwide cave network.

Cortos: Hardy wing drakes living in the hoarfrost reach. These scavengers and predators of small creatures survive the freezing conditions thanks to antifreeze in their blood. Their wing anatomy is similar to halks, but their snake-like head puts them firmly as the closest living relatives of remobra.

Regitrice: These small old world wing drakes are only found in the sandy planes and are known for the lustrous colors on the males. Interestingly, the second digit has unfused with the third.

Barnos: Aggressive new world wyverns, barnos do whatever they can to survive in the harsh environment of the everstream and elder’s recess and display pack hunting and swarming behaviors. Their wing anatomy is like that of halks and cortos, but they have lost another pair of pseudophalanges, leaving them with a single pair left.

Raphinos: Skittish new world wing drakes endemic to the coral highlands, they feed on coral eggs and a variety of “flora” using their beak. Their wing anatomy is nearly identical to that of a barnos, making them their closest living relatives.

Mernos: Timid new world wing drakes endemic to the ancient forest. Unlike raphinos and barnos, their wing anatomy is more like those of other wing drakes like halks and cortos. Mernos proved to be very easy to tame, take care of, and train, so they have become vital modes of transportation for the Research Commission.

Noios: These close relatives to Mernos are defined by their vulture-like appearance, distinctive calls vaguely mimicking diablos roars, and the fact that they’re only found in the wildspire waste. Noios are more omnivorous than their relative, and take advantage of what resources they can in the harsh desert. It’s thought that the common ancestor of the mernos and noios lived in the ancient ancient forest, and that during tropical storms the winds carried some individuals into the wastes. Those that became stranded became noios.

[weirdmarioenemies]

Name: Googles

Debut: Webkinz

What a cute silly plush duck! Right? WRONG! Goose? INCORRECT! This is no duck. This is no goose. This is no animal we have in our world. This is a Googles, and you have never seen anything like it!

Webkinz, as you likely know, is one of those 2000s Virtual Pet Worlds, with the gimmick of buying a real plush animal that would allow you to play with that animal in the game. And I mean animal! For the most part these are all actual animals, or at least variants of them, like a dog with a watermelon color scheme, or a lion with a flower petal mane. There are also some mythical creatures like dragons, which, yeah, it makes sense. Of course kids would want to have one of those as a virtual pet!

Then there are the Zingoz, original little monster guys who get whacked with bats by bigger monster guys. I guess they're a little weird considering the setting, but "shape with face and limbs" is not on its own Weird. I have no feelings on Zingoz.

It is Googles that fascinates me so much! All of these real animals, some fantasy creatures, a few minor goofy monsters, and yet, there is Googles. They have ducks and geese in the game. This is not one of them. It is the mundanity of Googles that fascinates me so! Of all the things to be an original trademark species, they decided on a Kind Of Different Duck, and I delight in that.

But there IS a reason for Googles! A point of origin! It would have been FUNNIER if there wasn't, but it's ok. It still is nice and makes me smile.

In the 1980s, GANZ, the company that would go on to make Webkinz, released a series of funny little flat plushes, including this ducky one! And that name on the tag... that's Googles! From what I can tell, this whole series was known as Googles, and included other species, like dogs and walruses, but these duck-billed bowling pins were the most popular.

So for Webkinz, they decided to revive one of their old, beloved plush creatures, bringing Googles to new generations while not telling them about its origins, making this silly fowl a strange, mundane mystery! And THAT is all you need to know about the taxonomy of Googles.

At least, that's what I thought until I found out about this official animated music video for babies, that repeatedly refers to an individual Googles as a PLATYPUS. Platypus?! Where's the TAIL? That's one of the most important features to represent! Their bills certainly are broad, but I assumed it was just a stylization thing. And if platypus, where are their forelegs?

I do not accept this answer. I do not think I will ever find a satisfactory conclusion. I admit defeat, Webkinz Animated Music Video From 2010. You have bested me.

[dailyadventureprompts]

Tableskills: Creating Dread

I've often had a lot of problems telling scary stories at my table, whether it be in d&d or other horror focused games. I personally don't get scared easily, especially around "traditionally horrifying" things so it's hard for me to recreate that experience in others. Likewise, you can't just port horror movie iconography into tabletop and expect it to evoke genuine fear: I've already spoken of being bored out of my mind during the zombie apocalypse, and my few trips into ravenloft have all been filled with similar levels of limp and derivative grimdark.

It took me a long time (and a lot of video essays about films I'd never watched) to realize that in terms of an experience fear is a lot like a joke, in that it requires multiple steps of setup and payoff. Dread is that setup, it's the rising tension in a scene that makes the revelation worth it, the slow and literal rising of a rollercoaster before the drop. It's way easier to inspire dread in your party than it is to scare them apropos of nothing, which has the added flexibility of letting you choose just the right time to deliver the frights.

TLDR: You start with one of the basic human fears (guide to that below) to emotionally prime your players and introduce it to your party in a initially non-threataning manor. Then you introduce a more severe version of it in a way that has stakes but is not overwhelmingly scary just yet. You wait until they're neck deep in this second scenario before throwing in some kind of twist that forces them to confront their discomfort head on.

More advice (and spoilers for The Magnus Archives) below the cut.

Before we go any farther it's vitally important that you learn your party's limits and triggers before a game begins. A lot of ttrpg content can be downright horrifying without even trying to be, so it's critical you know how everyone in your party is going to react to something before you go into it. Whether or not you're running an actual horror game or just wanting to add some tension to an otherwise heroic romp, you and your group need to be on the same page about this, and discuss safety systems from session 0 onwards.

The Fundamental Fears: It may seem a bit basic but one of the greatest tools to help me understand different aspects of horror was the taxonomy invented by Jonathan Sims of The Magnus Archives podcast. He breaks down fear into different thematic and emotional through lines, each given a snappy name and iconography that's so memorable that I often joke it's the queer-horror version of pokemon types or hogwarts houses. If we start with a basic understanding of WHY people find things scary we learn just what dials we need turn in order to build dread in our players.

Implementation: Each of these examples is like a colour we can paint a scene or encounter with, flavouring it just so to tickle a particular, primal part of our party's brains. You don't have to do much, just something along the lines of "the upcoming cave tunnel is getting a little too close for comfort" or "the all-too thin walkway creaks under your weight ", or "what you don't see is the movement at the edge of the room". Once the seed is planted your party's' minds will do most of the work: humans are social, pattern seeking creatures, and the hint of danger to one member of the group will lay the groundwork of fear in all the rest.

The trick here is not to over commit, which is the mistake most ttrpgs make with horror: actually showing the monster, putting the party into a dangerous situation, that’s the finisher, the  punchline of the joke. It’s also a release valve on all the pressure you’ve been hard at work building.

There’s nothing all that scary about fighting a level-appropriate number of skeletons, but forcing your party to creep through a series of dark, cobweb infested catacombs with the THREAT of being attacked by undead? That’s going to have them climbing the walls.

Let narration and bad dice rolls be your main tools here, driving home the discomfort, the risk, the looming threat.

Surprise: Now that you’ve got your party marinating in dread, what you want to do to really scare them is to throw a curve ball. Go back to that list and find another fear which either compliments or contrasts the original one you set up, and have it lurking juuuust out of reach ready to pop up at a moment of perfect tension like a jack in the box. The party is climbing down a slick interior of an underdark cavern, bottom nowhere in sight? They expect to to fall, but what they couldn't possibly expect is for a giant arm to reach out of the darkness and pull one of them down. Have the party figured out that there's a shapeshifter that's infiltrated the rebel meeting and is killing their allies? They suspect suspicion and lies but what they don't expect is for the rebel base to suddenly be on FIRE forcing them to run.

My expert advice is to lightly tease this second threat LONG before you introduce the initial scare. Your players will think you're a genius for doing what amounts to a little extra work, and curse themselves for not paying more attention.

Restraint: Less is more when it comes to scares, as if you do this trick too often your players are going to be inured to it. Try to do it maybe once an adventure, or dungeon level. Scares hit so much harder when the party isn't expecting them. If you're specifically playing in a "horror" game, it's a good idea to introduce a few false scares, or make multiple encounters part of the same bait and switch scare tactic: If we're going into the filthy gross sewer with mould and rot and rats and the like, you'll get more punch if the final challenge isn't corruption based, but is instead some new threat that we could have never prepared for.

Art

[melodiousmonsters]

I'm just going to start talking about my celestials each month to give you all some low effort and fun(for me) content. Also doing full illustrations of them as well, with some design notes at the end.

My interpretation of loodvigg, named Fhobia Denta Latrostratous (they're one of the three celstials with a full name at the moment) is a fair bit different from other's interpretations of it for extremely personal reasons. They're a tad bit strange, and creepy looking, but overall they are a compassionate (in their own strange way, like almost everything about them) and creative individual that's held as a role model for all shadowkind. They also have a lavender colored ring around their pupils so their eyes aren't fully pink, which is the main difference from the cannon loodvigg, along with the subtly different feathers, lower body, markings on the abdomen, and scales on the arms.

They are generally unexpressive (tonealy, the main way monsters express their emotions) yet VERY emotional. Over the years they gradually became more in control of their emotions due to sheer life experience, but they are still a little more irrational and driven by emotion than most of the other celestials.

They hate being touched, loud sudden/repetitive noises, math, people or things that get too into the meaning of art and other stuff like that, and the texture of a few things like fish meat or coarse fabrics. There are very few things they have a neutral opinion on, one of which is the taste of blood by itself.

They love keeping up their appearance in most situations, for example, their hair isn't naturally like that, they use their saliva like hair jell and specifically style it to look like that, also they would be absolutely rancid smelling and filthy with their diet of fresh meat and preferred locals of wet warm caves. They spend a lot of time cleaning themselves, which is extremely rare for monsters. They also like eating more than your average monster, they eat like a toddler because of how preoccupied with eating they get, collecting/making taxidermy and other oddities, and all critters, especially invertebrates though.

They are majorly interested in biological sciences, specifically preservation and taxonomy. They gave the celestials and dof era monsters/critters their scientific names(no I don't have scientific names for the celestials yet, I've kinda ran out of ideas for scientific names tbh). They happen to spend a lot of their time in a very large cave network with a lot of different types of caves that make good enclosures for keeping critters to study.

They care a lot about the other celestials as they are siblings and gets very angry if something bad happens to them, only if they feel it's undeserved, their empathy is a bit wacky and  inconsistent.

Also most shadow monsters tend to share in its odd mannerisms, sometimes the behaviors show up in completely non shadow affiliated monsters and no one knows why.

Disclaimer (I think that's the right word), yes you guessed right, Fhobia and the large majority of the shadow monsters are autistic, the term isn't used in universe as the monsters don't have a word for autism as they aren't that into psychology and "the way that monster is" has worked in place of a proper word historically, monsters aren't into categorizing others.

as for design notes and process here it is! all the stuff in red boxes are final.