Jump to content
Stray Fawn Community


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by Dingorok

  1. Yeah, the question is how purrsnout can be made more adorable, then. I'm thinking Puss in Boots level of adorable.



    His pupils can dilate to be cuter, but these guys can't, so maybe that's one thing. He can still look relatively cute even without large pupils, though:

    Image result for puss in boots

    Another thing is maybe the tufts on the sides of the purrhead aren't helping the cuteness. Maybe a rounder head would look more adorable. Maybe the proportions of the face need to be changed, too. 

    • Like 2
  2. I agree that the underwater world could be much more interesting. Another idea could be rainbow-colored coral reefs! Maybe you could dig for food or have a higher chance of finding food there, like crabs, shells, and fish, or even nesting material. It would also be nice to look at. You could also get a chance of getting poisoned or stung since reefs have some dangers (sea anemones, sea urchins, some species of fish- I am definitely in agreement that there should be more water species). The reef could be decayed with more and more digging just like how berry bushes or trees become barren, but it could respawn after a certain amount of days, too (like 10). 

    Image result for coral reef


    • Like 2
  3. On 5/10/2018 at 5:02 PM, DangerousDodo said:

    Just a little idea here, but maybe more vibrant, exotic manes could contribute to a male's attractiveness, just like the peacock tails currently do?

    I like the idea, but how would that be implemented unless manes let you call to attract wild animals too?

  4. 10 minutes ago, Pokestardragacraft said:

    Yea, I know what foil means and that must be a more recent change in stats. I’m so used to the +4 hearing and +1 heat resistance for the big ears. Due the the changes I was unaware of, I think that making D a perfect foil is still a good idea. I also like the idea of +1 camouflage in the trees. 

    Also what I believe @Dazenith is talking about is this post:



    Okay, good to know. +2 cold instead of +1 cold for b could work, too, but I guess Dazenith's problem with b's stats is that they're too similar rather than differentiated. Unfortunately, both ears look like they could serve similar functions, although they look vastly different. I do think a bird ear is more pertinent to include in the future, though, since we already have bird beaks and wings. 

    • Like 1
  5. Maybe instead of the old system, which annoyingly caused you to accidentally change a nicheling's name to AaaAAaA or some other long gibberish name, there can be a naming button (like the one found in the family tree screen) that you have to purposely click in the circle profile before you can change the name. To save the name, just press enter.


    Either put the naming button on:

    a.the side panel with the 4 current options as a new 5th option OR

    b. inside of the circle profile near the name. 

    • Like 3
    • Thanks 1
  6. 3 hours ago, Pokestardragacraft said:

    I like A, B, and D. Although for D, I would get rid of the heat resistance, camouflage, and speed stats to make more like a foil to the big ears.

    Hmm, a foil is an opposite. Big ear is currently +4 hearing, +2 heat, -1 cold. Why would getting rid of heat resistance make d a foil? To make d a perfect foil, it would have to be +4 hearing, +2 cold (instead of the proposed +1), -1 heat. 

    Regarding camouflage, I just read something that made me think I should change d from -1 camouflage to +1 camouflage: http://scienceblogs.com/tetrapodzoology/2008/07/14/owl-ear-tuft-mystery/

    "Finally, there’s the camouflage hypothesis. Because some owl species erect their ear tufts when alarmed by approaching danger (while at the same time adopting a vertically elongate body shape different from their more rotund resting pose), it’s been suggested that ear tufts help break up the owl’s outline and make it appear more like a broken branch. Perrone (1981) noted that the camouflage hypothesis would only apply if ear tufts were present in those owls that roost during the day: diurnal owls roost at night and, in theory, shouldn’t require visual tricks to conceal themselves from predators. Tufted owls should also roost in places where the tufts might aid in concealment; presumably, in locations where the ear tufts might help break up the owl’s shape (like in trees, and not in cavities or on the ground). In other words, the hypothesis predicts that ear tufts should be restricted to tree-roosting nocturnal owls. And this does (mostly) appear to be the case: tufted owls are all forest-dwelling and nocturnal (though note that not all populations of all tufted species are forest-dwelling)."

    So maybe it could be +1 camouflage under the condition that the creature is in a tree. A pretty limited use of camouflage, though, since only flying creatures could benefit. 🤣 

    2 hours ago, Dazenith said:

    I kind of like B the most.
    Stats though I'm torn since I like the proposed Fluffy Ears with similar stats.

    Which one is fluffy ears? Letter c?

    Thanks everyone for the input so far!

    • Like 1
  7. I think it would be cool if there were an ear gene to make bird-like creatures feel even more bird-like. These are some of my ideas of what a bird ear could look like. Please let me know which design(s) you like the best if any, and feel free to chime in with more ideas if you have any. Ultimately if there were a bird ear gene implemented, I would likely only want 1-2 (if they offer a lot of variety, then 2; otherwise, just 1 would be nice) to be chosen as "the bird/feathered ear allele(s)", so to speak. These are just some possibilities I came up with on the fly. 😉

    Gene modifiers by each design (some of them have either/ors because I can't decide which is better; that's where your input comes in):

    a. No visible ear, covered by fur. Your classic, simple bird design. +3 hearing (normal hearing).

    b. Feathered ear (kind of like dodomingo). +3 hearing (normal hearing), +1 cold resistance (due to the extra feathering), -1 heat resistance (due to the extra feathering).

    c. Phoenix-like layered feather ear. Is much longer and fancier than the feathered ear. Either +3 hearing (normal hearing) or +2 hearing (less than normal hearing because of the thick feathering around the ear), +2 cold resistance, -2 heat resistance (more temperature differences than feathered ear just because of the length), -1 or -2 camouflage (because they're so noticeable). 

    d. Tufted ear, a little like a great-horned owl's tufts called "plumicorns", which are not actually part of their ears, but I based this design off of them visually. This design also comes with the bird-of-prey "brow". +4 hearing (since it's based on a bird of prey, which is known for great hearing), +1 or +2 cold resistance (due to the extra feathering), -1 heat resistance (due to the extra feathering), -1 camouflage (because they stick up so much)  +1 camouflage in trees (changed because scientists currently hypothesize that owls with tufts benefit from their branch-like appearance), +1 speed (the thin, angled back design aids streamlining, which is important in fast movement). 

    e. Ear hole visible. Certain bird species have more clearly seen ear holes than others, such as ostriches, which have less feathering on their heads than many other bird species. Even though this design is based on ostriches, this doesn't mean that the nicheling's head overall would appear to have less fur. It just means that the ear hole can be seen as opposed to letter a's covered ear hole. +4 hearing (ostriches have good hearing, and the bare ear hole likely helps), + 1 heat resistance (because less feathering), -1 cold resistance (because less feathering). 



    Thanks for considering this idea!

    • Like 5
  8. On 4/27/2018 at 2:08 AM, Dr. Nearo said:

    Hey, I suggested this last community vote! one thing I was thinking was maybe if you keep the standard ears looking as they are, and long ears can have one lopped over, like a dog or rabbit.

    I like that idea, too. Also, maybe rounded ears could be slightly wider but shorter than the current derpsnout's big ear to still give off a more rounded appearance. 

    • Like 1
  9. I also have a 2nd improvement on Derpsnout that I'd like to be considered: I think Derpsnout's ears should aesthetically still be reflective of their ear slot genes.

    I can see it going 1 of 3 ways:

    1) The small ear can still be round and deformed, but the larger ear should be reflective of whatever ear type they should express as the dominant phenotype. 


    2) Both ear SHAPES are reflective of whatever ear type they should express (e.g. both ears are pointy if they have normal or large ears), but one ear is still smaller than the other. I prefer this one. 


    3) The small ear is the one that is accurate in shape to whatever ear type they should express as the dominant phenotype, but the larger one is the current oddly formed larger ear of the Derpsnout.

    I would have suggested another option, that is, graying out the Derpsnout's ear genes like Spiky Body's tail genes and keeping Derpsnout's current ear structures while adding +3 hearing by default to Derpsnout, but that would negate hearing boons, like if you had +4 hearing from Big Ears.


    • Like 7
  10. I'd like Spiky Body to have an additional ability based on its appearance.

    I want Spiky Body to have the ability to pick cacti without losing health since Spiky Body looks hardy and looks like it would be afforded protection against similarly spiky organisms like cacti. 

    Thanks for the consideration!

    • Like 3
  11. I'd like Derpsnout to have an additional ability based on its appearance.

    I want Derpsnout to have distasteful appearance since it visually is very asymmetrical and jarring; it doesn't look very appetizing to me!

    Thanks for the consideration!

    • Like 4
  12. I kind of like this idea, but I also don't. I like it because it kind of doesn't make sense that there isn't ear variation (e.g. why always round ears, and why always 1 big and 1 small regardless of genes?).


    I don't like, it, though, for 2 reasons: 1) Derpsnout the name implies that something went wrong, so it makes sense that the ear appearance is also always out of wack because of this awry gene.  2) Tail genes are always overwritten by spiky body even though the tail outcome is not usually controlled by the body. I think of derpsnout as being synonymous in effect, and so I ultimately don't mind the derpsnout ears always looking the same.

  • Create New...