Sagan 4 Forum [Menu]

The texturing is very fun

This looks like a slightly different style for you. I like the texturing. It's interesting to see multiple shades of green on a plent.

I noticed it eats young Falsegloxes, which (judging by the description I made for the adults) live near Alpine Cirruses. How does it withstand the rashes of Alpine Cirruses? Is it naturally immune? Does it simply ignore the pain? Are its feet so fuzzy they protect it from the rashes? Does it pursue prey into Drake Alpine rarely enough that the sting of Alpine Cirruses isn't really an issue? Does it eat larval-stage young Falsegloxes, or juveniles, which have a different shape?

QUOTE (Coolsteph @ Aug 12 2022, 11:10 PM)

This looks like a slightly different style for you. I like the texturing. It's interesting to see multiple shades of green on a plent. I noticed it eats young Falsegloxes, which (judging by the description I made for the adults) live near Alpine Cirruses. How does it withstand the rashes of Alpine Cirruses? Is it  naturally immune? Does it simply ignore the pain? Are its feet so fuzzy they protect it from the rashes? Does it pursue prey into Drake Alpine rarely enough that the sting of Alpine Cirruses isn't really an issue? Does it eat larval-stage young Falsegloxes, or juveniles, which have a different shape?

Hm, I think the trichomes on the feet would help protect them from scraps on the Alpine Cirruses somewhat. As for the young, the Puratora would prey upon both the larval stage young if it find them, but more often it will hunt down the juveniles when it can. Either way, the species is a semi-uncommon sight in that area and i'll be edited the biomes to address it as such

Might I suggest, when writing meta into descriptions, that you do less making it sound like a recent awesome big deal that this organism is around and instead have an explanation/justification as to why the organism went unnoticed in-universe? I try to do that so that someone reading Sagan through chronologically won't be confused, given how many millions of years passed since relevant events.

QUOTE (Disgustedorite @ Aug 14 2022, 12:03 AM)

Might I suggest, when writing meta into descriptions, that you do less making it sound like a recent awesome big deal that this organism is around and instead have an explanation/justification as to why the organism went unnoticed in-universe? I try to do that so that someone reading Sagan through chronologically won't be confused, given how many millions of years passed since relevant events.

Hm, how could I do such a thing in this particular instance then?

I wonder if this could become anything like the Enud again after some time (if it had any reason to).

Or if these guys could start producing a more dinosaur-like head shape like Dorite said this lineage could be able to.

"hard time,": A colon is needed here.
*not*: This should be in italics.
"live in tundra": I believe this should be "live in the tundra".
"completely extinct including": There should be a comma after "completely extinct".
"mega carnivores": Did you mean "very large carnivores"? I say this because there are mesocarnivores and hypercarnivores.
"carniasials": "Carnassials" is the correct spelling. Since this is such a specialized term, I recommend adding more context for its meaning.

What sorts of bones does it crush? It does have wooden teeth. Some species as of late have developed extra-hard, rock-like wooden teeth. The Mohs hardness of bone (judging by human bones) is 5, and a quick check suggests hardwood floors (without coatings) have a Mohs hardness of roughly 5.5. (https://metallicepoxy.sg/blog-post-12-pros-cons-of-hardwood/) Logically, plents' wooden teeth would be equivalent to some kind of hardwood, but since it's using its teeth for something so demanding, it could be worth specifying.

I'll have to get back to this later.

QUOTE (Coolsteph @ Sep 16 2022, 06:21 PM)

"hard time,": A colon is needed here. *not*: This should be in italics. "live in tundra": I believe this should be "live in the tundra". "completely extinct including": There should be a comma after "completely extinct". "mega carnivores": Did you mean "very large carnivores"? I say this because there are mesocarnivores and hypercarnivores. "carniasials": "Carnassials" is the correct spelling. Since this is such a specialized term, I recommend adding more context for its meaning. What sorts of bones does it crush? It does have wooden teeth. Some species as of late have developed extra-hard, rock-like wooden teeth. The Mohs hardness of bone (judging by human bones) is 5, and a quick check suggests hardwood floors (without coatings) have a Mohs hardness of roughly 5.5. (https://metallicepoxy.sg/blog-post-12-pros-cons-of-hardwood/) Logically, plents' wooden teeth would be equivalent to some kind of hardwood, but since it's using its teeth for something so demanding, it could be worth specifying. I'll have to get back to this later.

Alright, tried to make the needed grammatical edits, hope it looks good to go!

Approval Checklist:
Art:
Art Present?:y
Art clear?: y
Gen number?:y
All limbs shown?:y
Reasonably Comparable to Ancestor?:y
Realistic additions?:y

Name:
Binomial Taxonomic Name?:y
Creator?:y

Ancestor:
Listed?:y
What changes?:
External?: covered in growths of trichome, calcified teeth, smaller feet, bigger body, urinary patch beneath butt nostril
Internal?: wood spine of sail almost entirely enclosed by flesh
Behavioral/Mental?: active hunter
Are Changes Realistic?: y
New Genus Needed?: y, teeth n trichoomes

Habitat:
Type?: 3
Flavor?:2
Connected?: y
Wildcard?:

Size:
Same as Ancestor?: n
Within range?: y
Exception?:

Support:
Same as Ancestor?: n
Does It Fit Habitat?: y
Reasonable changes (if any)?: y, elaborated
Other?:

Diet:
Same as Ancestor?: n
Transition Rule?: y
Reasonable changes (if any)?: y, gained carnivore, gained photosynthesis (as a plent), lost kleptoparasitism, retained scavenger

Respiration:
Same as Ancestor?: y
Does It Fit Habitat?:y
Reasonable changes (if any)?:
Other?:

Thermoregulation:
Same as Ancestor?:n
Does It Fit Habitat?: y
Reasonable changes (if any)?: y gained trichomes
Other?:

Reproduction:
Same as Ancestor?: y
Does It Fit Habitat?:y
Reasonable changes (if any)?:
Other?:

Description:
Length?: good
Capitalized correctly?: seems good
Replace/Split from ancestor?: split? I think it actually is replaced, but doesn't explicitly say.
Other?:

Opinion: pending? Basically approved, just needs to explicitly say if replaced.

for example;

"The purotora and its direct ancestor " --> "The purotora and its direct ancestor, which it replaced, ... "

This post has been edited by colddigger: Oct 19 2022, 11:22 PM

QUOTE (colddigger @ Oct 20 2022, 03:18 AM)

Approval Checklist: Art: Art Present?:y Art clear?: y Gen number?:y All limbs shown?:y Reasonably Comparable to Ancestor?:y Realistic additions?:y Name: Binomial Taxonomic Name?:y Creator?:y Ancestor: Listed?:y What changes?: External?: covered in growths of trichome, calcified teeth, smaller feet, bigger body, urinary patch beneath butt nostril Internal?: wood spine of sail almost entirely enclosed by flesh Behavioral/Mental?: active hunter Are Changes Realistic?: y New Genus Needed?: y, teeth n trichoomes Habitat: Type?: 3 Flavor?:2 Connected?: y Wildcard?: Size: Same as Ancestor?: n Within range?: y Exception?: Support: Same as Ancestor?: n Does It Fit Habitat?: y Reasonable changes (if any)?: y, elaborated Other?: Diet: Same as Ancestor?: n Transition Rule?: y Reasonable changes (if any)?: y, gained carnivore, gained photosynthesis (as a plent), lost kleptoparasitism, retained scavenger Respiration: Same as Ancestor?: y Does It Fit Habitat?:y Reasonable changes (if any)?: Other?: Thermoregulation: Same as Ancestor?:n Does It Fit Habitat?: y Reasonable changes (if any)?: y gained trichomes Other?: Reproduction: Same as Ancestor?: y Does It Fit Habitat?:y Reasonable changes (if any)?: Other?: Description: Length?: good Capitalized correctly?: seems good Replace/Split from ancestor?: split? I think it actually is replaced, but doesn't explicitly say. Other?: Opinion: pending? Basically approved, just needs to explicitly say if replaced. for example; "The purotora and its direct ancestor " --> "The purotora and its direct ancestor, which it replaced, ... "

There, clarified it’s a split

Cool, approved

"These adaptations still suit the purotora well with processing every part of a carcass,"
Every part?
At some point, we need to make a direct bone-to-wood hardness scale to quantify the properties of calcified wood vs. "petrolignin".