I'd like to add one point about using tails for defense. I tried designing a race of arboreal semi-bipedal lizards once, and thought that they would probably be able to weaponize their tails by wearing the '"tail sleeve" with spikes or by attaching slings to it. A tail would have a much greater length and amplitude compared to hands, and with enough skill could be a superior body part for throwing various projectiles like sling stones or javelins. People invented the atlatl to elongate the hand and increase the throwing range, so sapient lizards practicing tail throwing seems totally viable to me.
In the video I was discussing natural tail weapons. An appendage that has an offensive function by design. From an evolutionary standpoint a tail that can be weaponized later is not a possibility if it would have athropied prior to developing sentience or the technology to craft said weapons. Your example is completely fine tho.
I think for most humanoid races with tails the question "how did something like this evolve" doesn't really matter. Worgen in Warcraft for example. These only arose because human druids, who took the forbidden form of the wolf, could no longer get out of their wolf form, which is why they then became a hybrid of wolf and human (werewolf). I think that with so many races emerging in typical fantasy, it's rare that an actual evolutionistic approach is taken. In addition, the statement "that doesn't make any sense" is always a bit tricky, since there are countless, sometimes very blatantly disadvantageous body parts in nature that seem to have no use. For example, the "antlers" of many cicada species. Good video tho♥
Yes, with intelligent design or magical origins, evolution does take a back seat that is true. However, I would not say an evolutionary approach is rare, it is relatively common. Since genetics are a thing (as reproduction is seldom changed in settings), it has a chance to manifest in god-created worlds too, if enough time passes, and there are no countermeasures to cull genetic deviation. Either way, I'd be hard pressed to name any animal, plant, fungus or anything really, that has a feature with a tangible drawback, that provides no benefit whatsoever. As far as I know, cicada horns are either used to puncture the outer layer of trees they feed on, or to augment their "song". There are numerous animals with traits that make their life more difficult, but give them an edge in mating. Peacocks are a common example. Vestigial or superfluous features are also present in some cases, as the disadvantage they pose is negligible. One has to take a lot into account when determining if something makes sense on a creature or not, and while that makes it tricky, I do think it is a solid approach. Well, it's kind of the only approach for products of evolution, and that makes it all the more interesting for me.
What I’ve been struggling with is bipedal animals with hooves, like Satyrs and Fauns. And OH BOI is that hard to come across, with the best idea being that, since the hoof is technically a toe, it separates into four fingers that it balances on, but when put together still looks like one hoof. But besides that, nothing!
@@ACrowingCockatrice Do you have any advice to worldbuilders out there that are concerned that the analysis would be overwhelming? How should they get their start?
@@Guruc13 Well I'd say start with your speciality. Whether it is history or clothing, everyone has something they are very interested in, so that subject woul probably be the best place to begin and would likely give inspiration for other subjects. As for other areas, look around a bit online or read up on settings or aspects similar to the one you would create. Wikipedia gets a lot of bad press, but for superficial information, which would help you decide how something could fit into a certain setting, it is very helpful. Also, no need to go too in-depth. While defining a reason why a species has three fingers might be good to have in your back pocket, it likely will not come up in a story. Also, if you're studying chromosomes to add to the lore of your world, it is very impressive, but probably a bit excessive, so do not sweat about not including every detail. I think the best advice I could give on worldbuilding, is to involve others. Whatever you create, run it by a few people who can help in areas where you might not be an expert. However, I'm probably just talking out of my ass, cause I have limited experience in this, still working on my own setting, constantly altering it, as even these videos often make me realise mistakes I have made. All in all, start small, constantly revisit what you have already done, and ask for help where necessary. Probably.
@@ACrowingCockatrice Thank You! I hope everyone who reads this will find it a bit helpful, and I am glad that you too are in the process of bettering yourself!
It would be really cool to see more realistic beastmen in stories. With Elder Scrolls a lot of the stuff can easily be hand waved because the world was literally created by gods, has gods and ancient spirits who weren’t involved in its creation now messing with things, and metaphysics is intertwined into everything. That said a lot of stuff in the setting doesn’t really make sense. With the Khajiit they have a bunch of different forms based on the moon phase they were born under will determine what form they take; and the Argonians were created by a race of sapient trees from another dimension so both of those designs can just be hand waved. If either of those evolved most of their lore and biology would have to be radically changed to the point where they just share the name. It would awesome too see a setting where they meticulously went over everything and reinterpreted to be scientifically accurate. While still having a large amount of metaphysics similar to Brandon Sanderson’s books where they are more akin to physical laws that can’t be changed or broken. Me and my cousin made up this fantasy/sci-fi world and are trying to make it realistic and make sense (we haven’t actually published anything, don’t have a website, or other stuff like that so it’s more of a cool daydream). I would love to see your eventual video on arthropod races (bug men are the coolest thing in the world). You could talk about if the Parshendi and other creatures on Roshar are at all realistic (you would still have to take into account how their biology heavily relies on Brandon’s metaphysics to work). I’m also looking forward to your 6 limbed vertebrate video. It would be interesting to see just how radically different the world would be if those existed. Maybe you could also talk about if Cartilaginous fish or stuff like Dunkleosteus colonized the land rather than our ancestors. Do you think it would be at all possible or likely for a vertebrate to evolve mandibles like the Halo Elites or Predator? (that would be so cool to see) You should do a video on super parasites like the Flood, the Thing, Necromorphs, and various other things like that talking about if they are plausible or downright asinine. I’d love to see you just tear apart the nonsensical biology of Sonic the Hedgehog characters with their weird noodle limbs, monoeye with two independent irises, and posture. The games are fun but if you apply science to them it just falls apart. Also the continuity or lack there of has been a complete oof fest (this was my personal favorite ua-cam.com/video/rMXqu8hq3d4/v-deo.html), also this weirdo who officially wrote for the comic legally claimed almost 200 original characters because Sega was too incompetent to keep his contract and contest his copyright claim until a few months too late. I feel so bad for all the normal people in that fandom because a lot of the games have been awful due Sega’s incompetence, and they are viewed as sickos because of deviantart.
Yeah, Elder Scrolls lore is like an excuse to be able to do anything, I simply used the khajiit and argonians to showcase features in general. I mean, lizards have breasts there, of course they had to come up with all sorts of stuff to justify their older design choices. About mandibles, it depends on what kind. The predator's ones seem to have bones within, so they are mandibles only in appearance. While they seem a bit redundant for a creature with actual hands and a jaw, there might some niche situation where little clawed limbs would provide a tangible advantage, so I wouldn't rule them out completely. I'll probably do a video on sci-fi zombie parasite type creatures in the future, but when it comes to cartoons like Sonic, I do not think I will. Stuff like that was never meant to be realistic or logical even, it's made with an entirely different mindset. Plus, if we disregard live action adaptations, it's just an artstyle, can't really criticize that for not being anatomically correct. I'd rather focus on stuff that wishes to take itself seriously, like a gritty and "realistic" mushroom zombie apocalypse that fails to function on a fundamental level, and its creator are oblivious to its massive flaws.
This is important to keep in mind for worlds that ARE trying to replicate reality in how they work, that is not necessary the best or only approach to take, Tolkien and Miyazaki were/are both incredible world builders and story tellers and their world building isn't built on replicating reality, they're built on replicating myth in extreme detail and that being one of the strengths of their stories. It is very much a viable approach to take
Sure, if you establish rules as to why things work the way they work, you can deviate from reality as much as you'd like without taking a hit to believability. The problems come from the fact when people cherry pick what they want to keep of the real world when building their own without respecting the interconnected nature of everything, and inadvertently cause contradictions and impossibilities within the setting they are buliding. I'd argue that such basic things like stature or the ability to use one's lips to formulate words are so basic, that they are almost universal. There can be some added laws, magic or what have you to influence these factors, but the very fact that there should be some amendments made to facilitate deviation is reason enough to say that it is necessary to give it some thought. I firmly believe that a good world is one that could exist without issue in the context of its own ruleset. This is naturally not the only thing determining its quality, but it is the most fundamental, as it promotes verisimilitude, allowing people to immerse themselves without problems yanking them out of the experience.
@@Morgan-bo1mr I have purposefully not mentioned any person, and if what I wrote makes you think Tolkien made mistakes, well, you answered your question really. It is reductive to place people on pedestals, shower the best parts of their work with praise and sweep under the rug any potential area where they may falter, where there might be a chink in the armor, where something might be off or cause inconsistencies/contradictions elsewhere. Tolkien made a great world and great stories within them, but to say that everything he made is perfect and beyond any level of scrutiny is pointless really. To understand what makes somethign good or great, it is best to look at it objectively, acknowledge both strong points and flaws, and learn from them.
Something to consider for language and communication inter-species is that it may be easier for each species to learn to understand a language in spoken form. They wouldn't have to speak it just be able to understand it. An English speaker and Japanese speaker could have a full conversation in the native language without either of them being able to speak the other language as long as both of them could understand both languages. In my story, there is evolution. Specifically, humans. Every other race was created by a god or through magic. However, even races created through magic can evolve given enough time. Each race also has a backstory, for example, elves came from the god Freyr as he is the ruler of Alfheimr which is the Norse home of the elves. The fun thing about magic is it makes it easy to example why a creature that looks human has 6 or more limbs. It's really the only way to explain angels. Some races are just magical in nature so trying to develop them through evolution is a fool's errand.
My World handles this with the Druidic Races. Gnolls are indeed related do humans. They are humans actually, but due to hyaenas being a sacred animal to their culture, they used magic to replicate the physical traits of a hyaena. This goes for Kobolds, Satyrs, Vampires, Yuan-Ti, Fairies...
Fantastic! And also a crowing cockatrice, i will request you to do monsters dissected: wendigo - beast of algonquian folklore video because the cryptozoological form of wendigo is a deer like beast, and wendigo will be portrayed as a mammalian species in this video.
On the subject of speech: the way we talk is just shaping words with our lips and tongue. There's nothing preventing a monstrous race from doing the same thing provided they have relatively articulate lips and a tongue. On the subject of tails: tails are cool, you're wrong :V
It's good to do due research to make things plausible, but don't focus on it too much to avoid falling into the worldbuilding hole. The selling point of a story is the story itself. If the story is shit, then everything else falls. I'm doing some worldbuilding with "anthropo-morphish" creatures and I will keep in mind these things you bring up like, for example, how phonetically capable these creatures are based of their physiology. I guess I will have them use sign language if they are physically uncapable of speech. Most fiction do not implement the concept of non humans too well. Having different intelligent species should have a tremendous impact in societal developement, INFRASTRUCTURE, industrialization, war, politics and commerce beyond the trope of "CaT PPl haet LiZArd ppL" (yeah, I'm looking at you Elder Scrolls), or "HooMaN hAet evrThiNg diFfEreNT" (aka Skyrim for the Nords).
For most people story and characters are far more important than worldbuilding, and on a fundamental level there's a truth to that. The world is incredibly complex and there's no reason to tackle every minute detail when building your own, however, most draw that line way too early. Elder Scrolls is a perfect example of throwing shit at the wall without thinking about what that shit is, how it was made or how it fits with the rest of the shit already on the wall. I don't think I go overboard with these kinds of videos, as these are relatively simple thoughts that do not require deep scientific knowledge of any kind. They simply tackle the issues with common tropes and insufficient design.
I'd like to add one point about using tails for defense. I tried designing a race of arboreal semi-bipedal lizards once, and thought that they would probably be able to weaponize their tails by wearing the '"tail sleeve" with spikes or by attaching slings to it. A tail would have a much greater length and amplitude compared to hands, and with enough skill could be a superior body part for throwing various projectiles like sling stones or javelins. People invented the atlatl to elongate the hand and increase the throwing range, so sapient lizards practicing tail throwing seems totally viable to me.
In the video I was discussing natural tail weapons. An appendage that has an offensive function by design. From an evolutionary standpoint a tail that can be weaponized later is not a possibility if it would have athropied prior to developing sentience or the technology to craft said weapons. Your example is completely fine tho.
I think for most humanoid races with tails the question "how did something like this evolve" doesn't really matter.
Worgen in Warcraft for example. These only arose because human druids, who took the forbidden form of the wolf, could no longer get out of their wolf form, which is why they then became a hybrid of wolf and human (werewolf). I think that with so many races emerging in typical fantasy, it's rare that an actual evolutionistic approach is taken. In addition, the statement "that doesn't make any sense" is always a bit tricky, since there are countless, sometimes very blatantly disadvantageous body parts in nature that seem to have no use. For example, the "antlers" of many cicada species.
Good video tho♥
Yes, with intelligent design or magical origins, evolution does take a back seat that is true. However, I would not say an evolutionary approach is rare, it is relatively common. Since genetics are a thing (as reproduction is seldom changed in settings), it has a chance to manifest in god-created worlds too, if enough time passes, and there are no countermeasures to cull genetic deviation.
Either way, I'd be hard pressed to name any animal, plant, fungus or anything really, that has a feature with a tangible drawback, that provides no benefit whatsoever. As far as I know, cicada horns are either used to puncture the outer layer of trees they feed on, or to augment their "song". There are numerous animals with traits that make their life more difficult, but give them an edge in mating. Peacocks are a common example. Vestigial or superfluous features are also present in some cases, as the disadvantage they pose is negligible. One has to take a lot into account when determining if something makes sense on a creature or not, and while that makes it tricky, I do think it is a solid approach. Well, it's kind of the only approach for products of evolution, and that makes it all the more interesting for me.
Oh my god, I'm feeling for this parrot now maaaaan
Me too.
I've made a cat race that uses the tail for balancing in space, as it's soft sci fi / high fantasy. Thanks for your perspectives! Such gems.
What I’ve been struggling with is bipedal animals with hooves, like Satyrs and Fauns. And OH BOI is that hard to come across, with the best idea being that, since the hoof is technically a toe, it separates into four fingers that it balances on, but when put together still looks like one hoof. But besides that, nothing!
Excellent video my friend! You've inspired me to take a much closer look at the worlds I read about - fantasy in particular
This was precisely my goal! A setting that is caringly built from the ground up is always superior to one cobbled together from shallow ideas.
@@ACrowingCockatrice Do you have any advice to worldbuilders out there that are concerned that the analysis would be overwhelming? How should they get their start?
@@Guruc13 Well I'd say start with your speciality. Whether it is history or clothing, everyone has something they are very interested in, so that subject woul probably be the best place to begin and would likely give inspiration for other subjects. As for other areas, look around a bit online or read up on settings or aspects similar to the one you would create. Wikipedia gets a lot of bad press, but for superficial information, which would help you decide how something could fit into a certain setting, it is very helpful. Also, no need to go too in-depth. While defining a reason why a species has three fingers might be good to have in your back pocket, it likely will not come up in a story. Also, if you're studying chromosomes to add to the lore of your world, it is very impressive, but probably a bit excessive, so do not sweat about not including every detail.
I think the best advice I could give on worldbuilding, is to involve others. Whatever you create, run it by a few people who can help in areas where you might not be an expert.
However, I'm probably just talking out of my ass, cause I have limited experience in this, still working on my own setting, constantly altering it, as even these videos often make me realise mistakes I have made.
All in all, start small, constantly revisit what you have already done, and ask for help where necessary.
Probably.
@@ACrowingCockatrice Thank You! I hope everyone who reads this will find it a bit helpful, and I am glad that you too are in the process of bettering yourself!
It would be really cool to see more realistic beastmen in stories. With Elder Scrolls a lot of the stuff can easily be hand waved because the world was literally created by gods, has gods and ancient spirits who weren’t involved in its creation now messing with things, and metaphysics is intertwined into everything. That said a lot of stuff in the setting doesn’t really make sense. With the Khajiit they have a bunch of different forms based on the moon phase they were born under will determine what form they take; and the Argonians were created by a race of sapient trees from another dimension so both of those designs can just be hand waved. If either of those evolved most of their lore and biology would have to be radically changed to the point where they just share the name.
It would awesome too see a setting where they meticulously went over everything and reinterpreted to be scientifically accurate. While still having a large amount of metaphysics similar to Brandon Sanderson’s books where they are more akin to physical laws that can’t be changed or broken.
Me and my cousin made up this fantasy/sci-fi world and are trying to make it realistic and make sense (we haven’t actually published anything, don’t have a website, or other stuff like that so it’s more of a cool daydream).
I would love to see your eventual video on arthropod races (bug men are the coolest thing in the world). You could talk about if the Parshendi and other creatures on Roshar are at all realistic (you would still have to take into account how their biology heavily relies on Brandon’s metaphysics to work).
I’m also looking forward to your 6 limbed vertebrate video. It would be interesting to see just how radically different the world would be if those existed. Maybe you could also talk about if Cartilaginous fish or stuff like Dunkleosteus colonized the land rather than our ancestors. Do you think it would be at all possible or likely for a vertebrate to evolve mandibles like the Halo Elites or Predator? (that would be so cool to see)
You should do a video on super parasites like the Flood, the Thing, Necromorphs, and various other things like that talking about if they are plausible or downright asinine.
I’d love to see you just tear apart the nonsensical biology of Sonic the Hedgehog characters with their weird noodle limbs, monoeye with two independent irises, and posture. The games are fun but if you apply science to them it just falls apart. Also the continuity or lack there of has been a complete oof fest (this was my personal favorite ua-cam.com/video/rMXqu8hq3d4/v-deo.html), also this weirdo who officially wrote for the comic legally claimed almost 200 original characters because Sega was too incompetent to keep his contract and contest his copyright claim until a few months too late. I feel so bad for all the normal people in that fandom because a lot of the games have been awful due Sega’s incompetence, and they are viewed as sickos because of deviantart.
Yeah, Elder Scrolls lore is like an excuse to be able to do anything, I simply used the khajiit and argonians to showcase features in general. I mean, lizards have breasts there, of course they had to come up with all sorts of stuff to justify their older design choices.
About mandibles, it depends on what kind. The predator's ones seem to have bones within, so they are mandibles only in appearance. While they seem a bit redundant for a creature with actual hands and a jaw, there might some niche situation where little clawed limbs would provide a tangible advantage, so I wouldn't rule them out completely.
I'll probably do a video on sci-fi zombie parasite type creatures in the future, but when it comes to cartoons like Sonic, I do not think I will. Stuff like that was never meant to be realistic or logical even, it's made with an entirely different mindset. Plus, if we disregard live action adaptations, it's just an artstyle, can't really criticize that for not being anatomically correct. I'd rather focus on stuff that wishes to take itself seriously, like a gritty and "realistic" mushroom zombie apocalypse that fails to function on a fundamental level, and its creator are oblivious to its massive flaws.
I think one monster races is
Newt man
This is important to keep in mind for worlds that ARE trying to replicate reality in how they work, that is not necessary the best or only approach to take, Tolkien and Miyazaki were/are both incredible world builders and story tellers and their world building isn't built on replicating reality, they're built on replicating myth in extreme detail and that being one of the strengths of their stories. It is very much a viable approach to take
Sure, if you establish rules as to why things work the way they work, you can deviate from reality as much as you'd like without taking a hit to believability. The problems come from the fact when people cherry pick what they want to keep of the real world when building their own without respecting the interconnected nature of everything, and inadvertently cause contradictions and impossibilities within the setting they are buliding.
I'd argue that such basic things like stature or the ability to use one's lips to formulate words are so basic, that they are almost universal. There can be some added laws, magic or what have you to influence these factors, but the very fact that there should be some amendments made to facilitate deviation is reason enough to say that it is necessary to give it some thought.
I firmly believe that a good world is one that could exist without issue in the context of its own ruleset. This is naturally not the only thing determining its quality, but it is the most fundamental, as it promotes verisimilitude, allowing people to immerse themselves without problems yanking them out of the experience.
@@ACrowingCockatrice are you really gonna argue that fucking Tolkien didn't have a solid understanding of the fundamentals of world building
@@Morgan-bo1mr I have purposefully not mentioned any person, and if what I wrote makes you think Tolkien made mistakes, well, you answered your question really.
It is reductive to place people on pedestals, shower the best parts of their work with praise and sweep under the rug any potential area where they may falter, where there might be a chink in the armor, where something might be off or cause inconsistencies/contradictions elsewhere. Tolkien made a great world and great stories within them, but to say that everything he made is perfect and beyond any level of scrutiny is pointless really. To understand what makes somethign good or great, it is best to look at it objectively, acknowledge both strong points and flaws, and learn from them.
Something to consider for language and communication inter-species is that it may be easier for each species to learn to understand a language in spoken form. They wouldn't have to speak it just be able to understand it. An English speaker and Japanese speaker could have a full conversation in the native language without either of them being able to speak the other language as long as both of them could understand both languages.
In my story, there is evolution. Specifically, humans. Every other race was created by a god or through magic. However, even races created through magic can evolve given enough time. Each race also has a backstory, for example, elves came from the god Freyr as he is the ruler of Alfheimr which is the Norse home of the elves.
The fun thing about magic is it makes it easy to example why a creature that looks human has 6 or more limbs. It's really the only way to explain angels. Some races are just magical in nature so trying to develop them through evolution is a fool's errand.
My World handles this with the Druidic Races.
Gnolls are indeed related do humans. They are humans actually, but due to hyaenas being a sacred animal to their culture, they used magic to replicate the physical traits of a hyaena.
This goes for Kobolds, Satyrs, Vampires, Yuan-Ti, Fairies...
Fantastic! And also a crowing cockatrice, i will request you to do monsters dissected: wendigo - beast of algonquian folklore video because the cryptozoological form of wendigo is a deer like beast, and wendigo will be portrayed as a mammalian species in this video.
📖✍️
The g in gnoll is silent
On the subject of speech: the way we talk is just shaping words with our lips and tongue. There's nothing preventing a monstrous race from doing the same thing provided they have relatively articulate lips and a tongue.
On the subject of tails: tails are cool, you're wrong :V
It's good to do due research to make things plausible, but don't focus on it too much to avoid falling into the worldbuilding hole. The selling point of a story is the story itself. If the story is shit, then everything else falls.
I'm doing some worldbuilding with "anthropo-morphish" creatures and I will keep in mind these things you bring up like, for example, how phonetically capable these creatures are based of their physiology. I guess I will have them use sign language if they are physically uncapable of speech.
Most fiction do not implement the concept of non humans too well. Having different intelligent species should have a tremendous impact in societal developement, INFRASTRUCTURE, industrialization, war, politics and commerce beyond the trope of "CaT PPl haet LiZArd ppL" (yeah, I'm looking at you Elder Scrolls), or "HooMaN hAet evrThiNg diFfEreNT" (aka Skyrim for the Nords).
For most people story and characters are far more important than worldbuilding, and on a fundamental level there's a truth to that. The world is incredibly complex and there's no reason to tackle every minute detail when building your own, however, most draw that line way too early. Elder Scrolls is a perfect example of throwing shit at the wall without thinking about what that shit is, how it was made or how it fits with the rest of the shit already on the wall.
I don't think I go overboard with these kinds of videos, as these are relatively simple thoughts that do not require deep scientific knowledge of any kind. They simply tackle the issues with common tropes and insufficient design.