Favourite Starting Race

[badarbiter]

My favorite is Human. Generally if I DO use TF's they're just for things like hair color, eye color, etc. I like staying as a regular human, this is both true in CoC, TiTS, AND FoE.

 

[Fenoxo]

Kui-Tan superior.

 

[Nonesuch]

Fen in choosing worst option shocker.

 

[DaBomb]

Fen in choosing worst option shocker.

Or maybe he knows something that we don't?

 

[Savin]

Nah he just likes giant balls. 

 

[Enigmatic D]

Kui-Tan would still be my second choice after Kaithrit. The mask makes me feel cool.

 

[Couch]

I actually tend to think even the balls the synthsheath gives you are too big.  I usually cut them down to around golf ball or billiard ball-sized, anything more than that is uncomfortable to think about.

 

[Fenoxo]

I actually tend to think even the balls the synthsheath gives you are too big.  I usually cut them down to around golf ball or billiard ball-sized, anything more than that is uncomfortable to think about.

It's almost like different people have different tastes.

But yeah, the prices in TiTS are definitely angled such that things with definite, specific results are many times more expensive than something that could do 20 different things to you. You pay for predictability.

Also, let's not get too off topic, I guess.

Human would be my second favorite for the reasons mentioned above, I tend to prefer the journey over the result.

 

[Blackwater Syn]

Drider. I really abuse minerva when it comes to my char's starting looks. And their ability to cum. I almost always start as a drider herm that can cum a small lake inside the poor sap I pin down. I only wish it was supported by the game, I miss covering things in webbing and turning my ovipositor on them.

 

[Geariah]

leithan because I like being big, first time I saw someone taller then me it freaked me out but after I got use to it I found it somewhat sexy

 

[The Color Nine]

Me, personally? I choose Kaithrit, and female, at that. Biggest Bewbs. Then I just go to Dr. Badger (though I do not believe she ever received a medical license) for a dick. Or, if I'm just there to fap, go see Penny and buy some Throbb.

 

[DjinnOfArc]

I personally choose to go with Ausar as my starting race. Maybe it's because I like to knot people, maybe it's because I think the dog tails + ears are cool. We may never know~

Second choice is a little harder to pick. Part of me likes to go with a human, maybe gene mod it up with some Sky sap and a that item on Tarkus that gives a horse shaft and balls (Typically try to go for a all pink look when I can.) and a Kui-tan. Both ways/choices give me a herm character I like in the end, but the gene mod really feels satisfying to do. IDK.

 

[CabalShadowBiscuit]

Kathrit for me. More hair color, more eye color. Plus cats are cute.

 

[flying_moustache]

I chose Kaithrit because Cat TFs are the next best runner-up for me.

Would have preferred either Goo, Vulpine or Vanae though.

 

[Darkwarpalg6]

My favorite starting race is galotian, when it comes out. For now my vote goes to Ausar as my favorite non-human starter.

 

[Number13]

When looking at the poll, Leithan is definitely not as popular as the other options. Poor Reptiles.

 

[Karretch]

When looking at the poll, Leithan is definitely not as popular as the other options. Poor Reptiles.

I can't recall exactly what it is but there's this thing about how "most" humans (may or may not be majority due to polling) find it uncomfortable to identify with anything that isn't human-like, be it shape, structure, or even simply skin color. I think this is the problem w/ leithan's popularity and the reason so many people choose human and barely do any radical cosmetic looks.

 

[JDeko]

my first non self-insert character is a Leithian and I really like her, very fun to play as a bunny-lizard-centaur

 

[Etis]

Problem with leithan is their tauric body. It blocks notable amount of scenes without opening any (only few alternatives, which are mostly sub-par to normal).

 

[Kesil]

My thoughts exactly (though we shold look for a better word than "tauric"). Design-wise, they're rather cool, but, for a smut game, they're nor precisely the best choice.

 

[Karretch]

While you're correct, what else evokes the idea of a humanoid torso where the head of an animal would be? In mythos and media the only thing like that is the centaur. Also, as far as I know, only other beasty that has -taur in it is the Minotaur.

 

[Etis]

My thoughts exactly (though we shold look for a better word than "tauric"). Design-wise, they're rather cool, but, for a smut game, they're nor precisely the best choice.

"taur" is common word for such body type.

 

[Kesil]

While you're correct, what else evokes the idea of a humanoid torso where the head of an animal would be? In mythos and media the only thing like that is the centaur. Also, as far as I know, only other beasty that has -taur in it is the Minotaur.

That's the problem: the centaur is the most widely known being with such frame. The thing is that "taur" means "bull", so that makes it about as correct as shortening "anthropomorphic" to "anthro" when it comes to refer to furries. :/

 

[Karretch]

That's the problem: the centaur is the most widely known being with such frame. The thing is that "taur" means "bull", so that makes it about as correct as shortening "anthropomorphic" to "anthro" when it comes to refer to furries. :/

While taur does mean bull, the one in centaur has no relation and is just part of yhe name

 

[Kesil]

Funnily, not even Wikipedia can point to what's with the relationship of centaurs with bulls, etymologically speaking. Myself, I'd prefer to use "quadrupeds", even if leithians have more than four legs. But, see, it's still wrong... which is why I feel we need another word before "taur" spreads even more.

 

[Etis]

Funnily, not even Wikipedia can point to what's with the relationship of centaurs with bulls, etymologically speaking. Myself, I'd prefer to use "quadrupeds", even if leithians have more than four legs. But, see, it's still wrong... which is why I feel we need another word before "taur" spreads even more.

More?
https://inkbunny.net/submissionsviewall.php?&mode=search&keyword_id=1538
https://e621.net/post?tags=taur

 

[Kesil]

Yes, more

 

[JesterHell]

My personal list goes

1. Human: for most of the reasons previously listed.
2. Leithan: love me some taur's.
3. Kui-Tan: Big Balls.

 which is why I feel we need another word before "taur" spreads even more.

Sorry but I like using taur in this way, its a lot like when I use necromancy I mean "controling the undead" not "divining from the dead" the historical usage of the word has little value to me beyond intellectual curiosity.

 

[Kesil]

You don't have to be sorry, given how widespread it is. It's just that it's the wrong term   It's not more about history as much as what the word itself means, if you get my point. I reckon that's what happens when you're a language enthusiast and your own language has had a lot of influence from Greek and Latin.

 

[JesterHell]

I got what you meant, its to do with the origin of words, tracing them back to the language of origin and what it meant there, how its was adapted to English ect..

Here' a quote from the Dwarf fortress forum on the topic that explain my take on it better then I ever could: Source

Drazinononda


You've touched on the next point I was going to make, having foreseen that the conversation would lead to it:

words are not real things.
People forget this, but a word is a collection of sounds (often represented by a set of written characters, in the world of man) that acts as a label for an intangible concept stored in a brain. Some are more culturally consistent than others; most Americans will picture the current president when they hear "the President," whereas most Americans will picture a generic monarch when they hear "the King." And some are more rigidly defined than others; it's a lot simpler and more widely known exactly what "seventeen" is than exactly what "impressive" is. But none of those words is an actual thing in and of itself. You can't go for a walk and find a necromancy lying on the ground; you could, theoretically, find a cent lying on the ground; but it might be a penny, or a few flecks of gold or a handful of sand. And those examples are of nouns, which should be the most tangibly definable, if anything is. Smirking, jesting, and denouncing are words that don't even refer to an object of any sort themselves. They are just symbols which refer to gestures which refer to attitudes which refer to stimuli.

The entirety of language, which encompasses every intelligent thought, is nothing but ideas and daydreams. There isn't a single concrete factor to it. It's constantly shifting, not as quickly on the whole as the mind of an individual does, but it is certainly never static. Which leads to a second point,

"correct" English is complete nonsense.
Even disregarding that English is the child born from an orgy of other languages, English itself has changed so much since its emergence as a distinct language that any attempt at an etymological "correctness" in the usage of English would render it completely non-understandable to anyone living, with the possible exception of a handful of language scholars of various sorts. Most Americans even have trouble following many Colonial era or early US documents because the use of the English language, even in things such as syntax and paragraphical structure, has changed so much in the past 2.5 centuries. Going back even further, there are "translations" of works such as Chaucer's Canterbury Tales and Gawain and the Green Knight because the English that they were written in looks like gibberish to modern-day English-speakers. Even spell-checking doesn't help much; so many of the words are either no longer in use or no longer in the same usage that the meaning entire sentences is lost on the layman trying to read them.

I get the feeling your one of the language scholars he mentions in the third paragraph