Beastfolk: Difference between revisions

From 2d4chan
Jump to navigation Jump to search
1d4chan>Lolianon
(As for that tidbit I'd argue that it's more about non-furry catwomen, poking fun at the blurry line between furry and not, but if you really want to keep it based on that I won't push it)
1d4chan>QuietBrowser
(It's literally nodding the head to what /tg/ says about furries, but actually practices in beastfolk threads. Plus, without the addendum, it just looks out of place; nobody doubts /tg/ likes its cheesecake.)
Line 8: Line 8:
When they hear the definition of "beastfolk" as "anthropomorphic animals", a lot of newcomers will ask just what the difference is between them and furries; after all, /tg/ hates furries, and yet most anons don't seem to mind, or even actively approve of, beastfolk. Well, the difference is that, on /tg/, a furry is defined not only by its anthro aspects but also by being a creepy little perv; it's that point when beastfolk get crossed with shameless [[magical realm]]ing and get stirred with the elitist attitude of [[That Guy]].
When they hear the definition of "beastfolk" as "anthropomorphic animals", a lot of newcomers will ask just what the difference is between them and furries; after all, /tg/ hates furries, and yet most anons don't seem to mind, or even actively approve of, beastfolk. Well, the difference is that, on /tg/, a furry is defined not only by its anthro aspects but also by being a creepy little perv; it's that point when beastfolk get crossed with shameless [[magical realm]]ing and get stirred with the elitist attitude of [[That Guy]].


Having beastfolk in your setting, or playing a beastfolk character, isn't inherently bad. Even having some level of sexuality isn't bad - /tg/ can appreciate a [[musclegirl]] in a [[Fantasy Armor|chainmail bikini]]. It's when you ramp up the sex level to the point the others at the table are creeped out that you've crossed the line. Especially if you claim "persecution" when others call you out on that shit.
Having beastfolk in your setting, or playing a beastfolk character, isn't inherently bad. Even having some level of sexuality isn't bad - /tg/ can appreciate a [[musclegirl]] in a [[Fantasy Armor|chainmail bikini]], even if she's wearing it over scales or fur. It's when you ramp up the sex level to the point the others at the table are creeped out that you've crossed the line. Especially if you claim "persecution" when others call you out on that shit.


Mind you, there are some anons on /tg/ who assert that the only "real" way to present beastfolk is as mindless ravening monsters who have no culture and exist only to be slain, insisting that even the slightest hint of culture makes them furry. Most ignore these people, as they are likely just trying to stir shit.
Mind you, there are some anons on /tg/ who assert that the only "real" way to present beastfolk is as mindless ravening monsters who have no culture and exist only to be slain, insisting that even the slightest hint of culture makes them furry. Most ignore these people, as they are likely just trying to stir shit.

Revision as of 23:33, 11 January 2018

Beastfolk is a term in /tg/'s lexicon used to collectively refer to any race which can be defined as a humanoid animal, an unofficial kinsfolk to terms like demihuman and goblinoid.

Beastfolk vs. Furries

What's wrong with a buff 'n' busty cat-woman in bikini-plate? Context, context, context.

Firstly, beastfolk being no better than furries is itself part of the anti-furry meme, and the argument erupts pretty much whenever there's a slow day. A good way to say it is "all furries are beastfolk, but sometimes not all beastfolk are furries". *BLAM* HERESY. SUFFER NOT THE FURRY'S LIES, LEST THEY LEAD THE FAITHFUL ASTRAY.

When they hear the definition of "beastfolk" as "anthropomorphic animals", a lot of newcomers will ask just what the difference is between them and furries; after all, /tg/ hates furries, and yet most anons don't seem to mind, or even actively approve of, beastfolk. Well, the difference is that, on /tg/, a furry is defined not only by its anthro aspects but also by being a creepy little perv; it's that point when beastfolk get crossed with shameless magical realming and get stirred with the elitist attitude of That Guy.

Having beastfolk in your setting, or playing a beastfolk character, isn't inherently bad. Even having some level of sexuality isn't bad - /tg/ can appreciate a musclegirl in a chainmail bikini, even if she's wearing it over scales or fur. It's when you ramp up the sex level to the point the others at the table are creeped out that you've crossed the line. Especially if you claim "persecution" when others call you out on that shit.

Mind you, there are some anons on /tg/ who assert that the only "real" way to present beastfolk is as mindless ravening monsters who have no culture and exist only to be slain, insisting that even the slightest hint of culture makes them furry. Most ignore these people, as they are likely just trying to stir shit.

List of Beastfolk

There are a lot of beastfolk races in /tg/ media, probably because "take an animal and make it humanoid" is as easy a way to come up with a distinctly "alien" race as any. Weird fact is, most of them come from Dungeons & Dragons, or at least have spread from there to other /tg/ media. Beastfolk as a concept are old, going all the way back to Basic Dungeons & Dragons or even to Runequest (the Broo aren't always evil there, after all).

Non D&D Beastfolk:

D&D Beastfolk:

Monstergirls

This article or section is about Monstergirls (or a monster that is frequently depicted as a Monstergirl), something that /tg/ widely considers to be the purest form of awesome. Expect PROMOTIONS! and /d/elight in equal measure, often with drawfaggotry or writefaggotry to match.

Beastfolk get the monstergirls treatment fairly readily. Indeed, they're often argued as some of the most basic-level monstergirls who actually look inhuman, in contrast to elves (humans with pointy ears), dwarves and halflings (shortstacks) or gnomes (shortstack elves). Catgirls and cowgirls are extremely well-recognized monstergirls for a reason, and other beastfolk readily get the same treatment.

At their most basic, monstergirlified beastfolk consist of a human girl with animalistic ears and a tail on an otherwise human frame (taking some liberties for beasts that don't have ears, like lizards). This is the most recognizable form of beastgirl, to the point that /a/ has its own word for it: Kemonomimi, meaning "Animal Ears".

However, these monstergirls cover a wide spectrum, with multiple different sorts of animalistic traits that can be added. Now, species plays its part, but some of the common traits include:

  • Limbs partially or wholly in fur/scales/chitin
  • Paws, claws or hooves in place of feet.
  • Paw-like hands.
  • Partial patches of fur/scales/chitin on the body, usually emulating exotic lingerie or costume pieces.
  • Clawed fingers/toes.
  • Missing digits.
  • Fangs or other oddly shaped teeth.
  • Other, stranger traits depending on species - multiple nipples and/or breasts, gills, and so forth.

The rarest format of all for beastgirl is the "very near anthro", where you have what is basically an anthro - but with a human's face under a thin layer of fur/scales. This is an extremely rare style, and usually associated with anime-emulating artists. *BLAM* HERESY. THAT IS CLEARLY DESCRIBING SOME FORM OF MUTANT, NOT ONE OF THE EMPRAH'S BLESSED ABHUMANS.

Contributing to the VNA style's rareness is that this design-style is hugely skubby even outside of /tg/; if the face is visibly human, but there is no visible separation between the human parts and the monstrous parts, in contrast to the traditional "human girl wearing a costume" look of beastgirls, then is it still a monstergirl, or it is a female anthro? Internet wars have been fought over this question, and neither side will give any quarter.

Gallery

Furries

WARNING: THESE IMAGES ARE HIGHLY HERETICAL IN NATURE, AND POSTING THEM CAN EARN A GLOBAL *BLAM* FROM /tg/. POST AT YOUR OWN RISK.

Monstergirls
Retrieved from "http://23.235.193.55/mediawiki/index.php?title=Beastfolk&oldid=62488"