# Biological Realism



## KILL.MAIM.KILL (Aug 30, 2018)

In the furry fandom, you see all kinds of weird stuf, like dogs with wings, improbable hybrids, half-demon-half-angel-half-kitsune-half-succubus-half-tractor-half-cat-half-dog-half-horse abominations, and so on. But it's also not uncommon to come across characters that stay faithful to their species, and for the most part, resemble a realistic species.

Some disregard all biological rules and do whatever they feel is cool.
Just see how many anthro snakes there are with giant breasts, for example.

Other stick with what is realistic and probable for their species. And some characters are in between.

So, where does your character fall?
Biologically accurate, or surreal and totally improbable?

Mine has a few inconsistencies, but he's a fictional species, which I have made rules for, and I try to make it probable and interesting. For example, he's a lizard-like creature, but has hair, which I explained as being 'feather-like'.


----------



## Mayflower (Aug 30, 2018)

I'm not sure how biologically accurate my characters are. They basically all have human physique, aside from their heads and tails. Their species doesn't matter in that regard, which, to me at least, makes a bit of sense. This way they all follow the same basic "rule" and I don't worry about how many breasts the characters should have, or if they should even have legs or hands.

I also keep it strictly to real species and realistic hybrids. I actually don't have any hybrid characters, but if I will one day make one, it will not be something that can't happen in real life.


----------



## Scout_Charger (Aug 30, 2018)

Well I just recently came up with my fursona and I have to say it never crossed my mind to go for a hybrid or anything mythical.
For me I choose a real species ( brown bear in my case) and aside from the whole walking on two legs and some changes in anatomy to make him look a bit more human he's still very much a bear.


----------



## KILL.MAIM.KILL (Aug 30, 2018)

Constance said:


> I'm not sure how biologically accurate my characters are. They basically all have human physique, aside from their heads and tails. Their species doesn't matter in that regard, which, to me at least, makes a bit of sense. This way they all follow the same basic "rule" and I don't worry about how many breasts the characters should have, or if they should even have legs or hands.
> 
> I also keep it strictly to real species and realistic hybrids. I actually don't have any hybrid characters, but if I will one day make one, it will not be something that can't happen in real life.



Ooh, that's something I forgot to factor in: 'furry' characters can vary greatly in terms of human to animal mixture. I'm not sure where the cutoff points are. Is an anime girl with cat ears and a tail furry, or no? Is an animal that pretty much looks like a wild animal, but can speak and occassionally stand up, furry?

Or am I asking unnecessarily deep questions about something completely inane and dumb? MOST LIKELY!

It makes sense that a less animalistic character would have less animal traits.


----------



## Peach's (Aug 30, 2018)

I've spent a lot of time thinking about if the ear movement I want in elves is actually physically possible, after looking at a lot mechanics of rabbit ears I think it should  be possible (they have like 110 degree movement and a surprising amount angular rotation).

If it isn't possible I can always just say its magic.


----------



## Hopei (Aug 30, 2018)

Passing off ridiculous looking creatures as believable is something I've always liked doing, and I enjoy using realistic element most of the time. But what I tend to compromise on is ways a charicter emotes that's recognisable to most peps like "eye brows", whites in the eyes/other indicators of eye direction, human-like body language, other recognisable signals often from domestic animals ect.


----------



## Derron116 (Aug 31, 2018)

For the most part as he is a feral. My body feathers aren't the same type of down that we currently believe Utahraptor bodies had. My body shape is a bit more avian as well and of course my facial features are able to convey human recognizable movement.

(I don't know why I went 1st person with this reply)

Here's my ref sheet so you can have a visual reference for what I'm saying: www.furaffinity.net: Zephyris Redsnout's First Reference Sheet (SFW) by Derron116


----------



## Deleted member 111470 (Aug 31, 2018)

I'd say 50/50. He's a plain ol' anthro monkey, which isn't that far from a feral one.

But then again I don't know much about monkeys so I might be wrong. Might be nothing like the species.


----------



## Casey Fluffbat (Sep 1, 2018)

I made a few exceptions for the sake of character design, but I took biology into account 95% (to the best of my knowledge, I'm no expert).


----------



## Dongding (Sep 2, 2018)

I stick to realism aside from... you know... being really god damn unreasonably stretchy in one or two specific areas.


----------



## Sagt (Sep 2, 2018)

I picked the last option because I thought it looked a bit lonely.

Don't have a fursona. Well I kind of do, but I'm never going to finish him, so I'm going to say I don't.

If I did have one, though, it would be just a plain talking dog. So... mostly biologically realistic I guess (or, at least as realistic as it can be when the creature is an anthro).


----------



## Infrarednexus (Sep 2, 2018)

My character might not apply biologically considering he is an artificial being. This is a double edged sword. It allows me to add extra features like hair to a dragon since it is scientifically possible for something man made. I can also give him super human characteristics and powers since it is a form of technology and not a supernatural concept. 

The downside to being artificial is that this means it is not logical for him to consume food or have functioning reproductive organs. While he can feel emotions and pain, it's not genuine, and he will never have a "soul" or "spirit" living inside him like his organic counterparts.


----------



## Skychickens (Sep 3, 2018)

I have a few oddities on mine but I try to keep them relatively close. Ferretd are obligate carnivores and while LV isn’t a pure carnivore, eating plant matter does still make them not feel well. 

Ignore the wings and the being mostly dead of course.


----------



## Inkblooded (Sep 6, 2018)

@KILL.MAIM.KILL

Plleas ecanyou get right to thw point and tell is if he has realistic lizard biology you know what i mean. thats what we al want to know


----------



## Redwulf16 (Sep 12, 2018)

My fursona's species has all the traits you would expect from a wolf-humanoid, 
save for the fact that they usually cook their food, though they do have an extremely
meat-heavy cuisine due to metabolic requirements.


----------



## Morning-mouse (Sep 15, 2018)

Not sure how realistic mine is. About as realistic as an anthro mouse could be I suppose. I even make sure to check off all the details to make sure I get things right even though I am pretty sure nobody would mind if I didn't. I mean, did you know mice can sleep for 14 hours a day? Oh my god it is like my dream come true!


----------



## Connor J. Coyote (Sep 16, 2018)

I answered half-and-half. As I'd say I'm (mostly) biologically accurate, with a few oddities and some human characteristics thrown in - that aren't biologically correct.


----------



## catscom (Sep 19, 2018)

As accurate as an anthro cat can be to real cats.  Well, digitigrade legs and padded paws to be clear.  A transformation sequence from feral to anthro would be extremely straightforward.

There are arguments that it's difficult to debate what can be considered accurate or realistic when anthropomorphic creatures don't actually exist.  There are degrees of anthropomorphism to consider too, as mentioned earlier in the thread.  These degrees are sometimes mixed and matched.  An anthro, humanoid character could be just like an animal in every way save the legs being plantigrade when digitigrade is standard for that species.  Would it be unrealistic?

As for hybrids, I don't really care for more extreme examples when I consider making them.  Biologically possible is probably what I'd go with, or at least anatomy that meshes together rather than something as different as a rodent / ungulate / bird hybrid.  All the power to those who make such mixes work attractively.  The design considerations are a mind bender.

When it comes to the cutoff point for anthropomorphic characters...  you could argue that characters in The Lion King are anthropomorphic simply because they can speak and express themselves in a human way.  So the sliding scale is not strictly only to consider anthropomorphic characters, but perhaps zoomorphic.  Characters that are fully human, save for ears and a tail like the kemonomimi concept.  Furries as most people know them would fall somewhere in the middle, perhaps leaning more zoomorphic if they have less feral traits like digitigrade legs, hands without pads or hoofnails, or whatever else is standard for a species.

Biological realism and 'furgonomics' - I probably think about it a little too much in regards to anthros.  :')
Sorry if this wasn't exactly on topic.


----------



## Cres Moon (Feb 12, 2019)

I've always considered anthros (this meaning those who share a lot of human physiology)  more related to humans than they are to their animal counterparts.  Just thought there'd be a different genetic code here and there and boom human with facial features like a canine and fur. So I guess all my characters are accurate to that extent. My weirdest hybrid is a Dragon Wolf hybrid.


----------



## Marius Merganser (Feb 12, 2019)

Marius is actually missing the key characteristic his species was named after.  He's a Mergus serrator (common name: red breasted merganser) but is not depicted with a serrated bill.  The eyes and bill are also much larger than they should be for expression.  His tail is more turkey-like but the plumage coloring is pretty accurate.


----------



## Troj (Feb 12, 2019)

I just want to say, Marius, I absolutely love your fursona and your avatar. Absolutely wonderful.


----------



## Marius Merganser (Feb 12, 2019)

Troj said:


> I just want to say, Marius, I absolutely love your fursona and your avatar. Absolutely wonderful.



Thank you!
Fortunately, it didn't take too many commissions to get the look I was hoping for.


----------



## Troj (Feb 12, 2019)

I adore the look. Reminds me of the traditional Disney style with a swirl of Howard the Duck.


----------



## Marius Merganser (Feb 12, 2019)

Troj said:


> I adore the look. Reminds me of the traditional Disney style with a swirl of Howard the Duck.



The early concept designs were based on the Disney and Warner Brothers ducks but anyone who's ever tried to draw them will tell you that their bills are extremely difficult to draw correctly.  I knew that would limit the artists I could commission and I wanted him to look more like an actual merganser, so I went for the Woody Woodpecker type bill.   

(I hear Howard is getting his own animated series on Netflix)


----------



## Cyberdragon (Feb 12, 2019)

Well, depends with fantasy creatures, I like to keep mine making biological sense (as if it could be a real creature from another world). I'm a general western style dragon with biologically realistic reptillian anatomy. My origin is a genetically created race of dragons. IE, I have wings big enough to fly, a head domed enough to fit a brain big enough to be highly intelligent for my size (without being too weird looking), and breath fire with chemicals not magic. My reproductive anatomy is based off crocs/gators (as I see a lot of people doing), and my facial expressions are rather stiff, though a keen eye can read them. Being mostly a carnivore, I have very little taste for sweetness (since fruits and whatnot are not my normal diet). I am also venomous, to ensure any prey that gets bit will die, even if it manages to escape (IE other large carnivores). Max size for my race is about the size of a cow (body wize), with males being larger than females.


----------



## Alex C. (Feb 13, 2019)

As much as i like science, a little bit of imagination is always welcome


----------



## Canis Dirus (Feb 13, 2019)

Somewhere around the second option. On the one hand, I don’t like all these acidic-colored sparkledogs and "rhino-mixed-with-mastino", on the other hand, I don’t see sense in the pursuit of absolute realism.


----------



## Jackpot Raccuki (Feb 14, 2019)

If you exclude the fact my fursona is half "kobold" which originated from a show that I watched and then modified(the species)...
Then yeah since he'd be a Grizzly bear and so far he's pretty accurate.
Plus good ol' Grizzly boys can stand up, and has 5 fingers, but not a thumb. >w>

But with my kobolds I try and keep them as biologically accurate as I can, in regards to them being (somewhat) possible to be real.
But they're from a fantasy setting so... Yeah not very accurate, mainly with their ability to potentially live off of rocks and cannon balls and what not. (Don't get me started on their sub-species...)

As someone who loves biology, I still enjoy some freedom to create stuff that would make my biology side of me mad, after all the internet allows for more freedom~


----------



## ManicTherapsid (Feb 14, 2019)

My species is extinct so it's all a bit hypothetical anyways, but i try to stick a bit with the Walking with Dinosaurs interpretation of Thrinaxadon. Although i have made the tail longer to make him a little more interesting.


----------



## rabbitears (Feb 14, 2019)

Sammy is perfectly realistic!! 
Except for being pink.
And having a tv for a head.
But otherwise completely normal!!


----------



## PercyD (Feb 14, 2019)

*Squint*
... Animal people are not biologically accurate. Thats like the guy who got mad that mermaids came in different skin tones. They are mermaids. They aren't real. They can be whatever you want.

However, it is fun to talk about how they might work. My sona is a prehistoric creature, so most of what is out there is just 'zoology fanfiction' any way, based on what they find in the fossil record.


----------



## JakeTheFoXx (Feb 14, 2019)

Jake fits in the "Mostly, but with a few oddities category".  
So my sona is supposed to be a cold climate fox, like an arctic fox, but with the red fox scheme (with cool temp color tones).


----------



## The Matte-Black Cat (Feb 19, 2019)

Mines is Somewhat real..I'm considered a Feral - however, I'm kinda liking the whole Anthropomorphic thing a bit..

A couple of oddities I have are being a "hybrid" - I doubt that a feline that's mixed with like five different big cat species would ultimately end up being completely black with silver white eyes..Also, despite my profile pics, my fursona has down ears that rarely stick up. My fursona also has a human feature - which is wearing jewelry - like my diamond cross necklace and having silver fangs.


----------



## Renneon (Feb 25, 2019)

I like both extremely realistic and drastically cartoony/surreal ones, and  everything in between  some designs just click with me more than others !
i think that seeing everyone's takes and ideas is what makes all this diversity very interesting and charming !


----------



## Nihles (Feb 26, 2019)

I'm just a plain ol' stone-cold _FOX_
Har har. My coat is a 'natural' color and the rest is just hair dye and nail polish. Maybe a little glitter.


----------



## Firuthi Dragovic (Feb 26, 2019)

My 'sona is half-disqualified from the question on account of being a fictional dragon.  On the other hand, even if you were to compare them to monitor lizards, the fins and ears kind of screw that up too (not to mention the horns).

Honestly, I prefer specific settings to have realism though not everything requires it for me to like it.  I did a post-apocalyptic RP once and originally intended "more human than animal", but the other players kept some of their species traits in - the rabbit was a vegetarian (though I never noted any consumption of eggs or dairy, I'll assume there's a reason why they weren't fully vegan because that player actually owned rabbits), the alpaca had a spitting tendency on at least one occasion, and the otter was a glutton partially because otters simply have higher metabolism (though they're not weasel-level).


----------

