Au Ra physiology and other lore.

Slightly off-topic but not really:
They said that in 2.55 Yugiri would be upgraded to a full Au Ra model, but she's still an Au Ra head and tail on a Miqo'te body.
I wonder when she'll become a real Au Ra. Please think of the Yugiri.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cilia

Snip

---

I don't know if I agree that the Roegadyn Sea Wolves would have developed webbed feet and hands if you're talking about the occasional drop into the ocean. Take humans, we evolved from land mammals, but we've been seafaring and swimming for fun ever since the dawn of our species, but we've seen no significant changes to hands and feet barring the occasional mutation (syndactyly). I would think that Roes would have had to have evolved from oceanic ancestry or spend more than half their lives IN actual water to start adapting to that environment in a physical sense, but you would probably see more endurance changes first than anything visual, like ability to hold their breath longer for example. But I'll say that I'm not familiar on their background, so I don't know if SE has established that they evolved from ocean creatures or if they evolved from land mammals like ourselves. Based on their appearance alone I would assume the latter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nataruma

snip

---

Ehh, the Sea Wolf webbed hand thing is a tertiary argument. Let's not get distracted like we did with the whole "Raubahn not blacking out after his arm got cut off" thing, mmkay?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kedrah

Slightly off-topic but not really:
They said that in 2.55 Yugiri would be upgraded to a full Au Ra model, but she's still an Au Ra head and tail on a Miqo'te body.
I wonder when she'll become a real Au Ra. Please think of the Yugiri.

---

Is it really that noticeable? Maybe it's the pose or something, but I'm surprised you noticed the difference because I really didn't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nataruma

Snip

---

Yeah.. I'm quite aware that that's the case. Just really bummed out because I really like reptilian races and this will likely be our only shot at having one and it's just massively disappointing for me. Even if we do get another new race my hopes in it being something that I really are absolutely dashed. The real annoying part is just dealing with in game models and in game roleplaying for me, if I do end up making an Au Ra, I've decided that she's going to be incredibly tall and it's going to be so annoying attempting to roleplay and having to provide a reference and going "Oh yeah she's like.. 7' so none of that "Blank leans over to get eye to eye with the short woman" thing" every time OOC wise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Samcaesar

Is it really that noticeable? Maybe it's the pose or something, but I'm surprised you noticed the difference because I really didn't.

---

I spent a lot of time examining Yugiri because she's my favorite character, lol.
And I main a Miqo'te so I know what their form and animations look like. It's pretty obvious to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kedrah

And I main a Miqo'te so I know what their form and animations look like. It's pretty obvious to me.

---

Are you blind, I'm pretty sure 80-90% of the posters in this thread are Cats; including the people you're commenting on.

What does that have to do with anything?
I'm just stating that's how I know what their model's skeletons look and behave like, since that person asked. o_o
It's not like I'm going "I KNOW THIS AND YOU DON'T HA HA!"

I don't recall SE ever saying Yugiri would be getting changed to an Au Ra model (or more proper; Au Ra animations) just that she'd be revealing her face in 2.55. Do you have a source?

I do not have a source, so I may very well be wrong, I just feel like I quite clearly remember that being said.
But it's not even important ╮(╯▽╰)╭

To yank the thread back to some form of its rails >_> what do you guys think, would Au Ra be cold or warm blooded? It depends entirely on what creature they're based off of, but whether demonic or reptilian I think it could work in either case. Visions of trips to Ul'dah ending up with super hyper Au Ra crop up in my mind... Apologies on if this has been discussed before in the thread, it's gigantic and I did my best to look through :3

Dragon. And those are warm blooded I would assume.

Given their general skin tones and biology (scales aside), they must be warm-blooded. Despite the scales and tail, in the main they are fairly clearly mammalian.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StarDrake

Given their general skin tones and biology (scales aside), they must be warm-blooded. Despite the scales and tail, in the main they are fairly clearly mammalian.

---

I'd also asume Warm bloodes as Steeps and Moutan Vallys can get deadly cold for reptilian cratures in winter. (Of course Dragons are an exception with the whole "inner fire" thing so I'd wadger dragons are more prone to water than ice.)

Why is everyone even stating them es reptilians? Dragons, sure, okay, I understand that, but (sorry, I didn't bother reading all 90 pages) weren't they confirmed to be more demonic than draconic?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reishi

Why is everyone even stating them es reptilians? Dragons, sure, okay, I understand that, but (sorry, I didn't bother reading all 90 pages) weren't they confirmed to be more demonic than draconic?

---

There has been no confirmation for or against. YoshiP stated while making a xaela that the theme is devil, but he could have been talking about the characrer he was in the middle of making. Lore just says that their relationship to dragons is disputed by scholars.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reishi

Why is everyone even stating them es reptilians? Dragons, sure, okay, I understand that, but (sorry, I didn't bother reading all 90 pages) weren't they confirmed to be more demonic than draconic?

---

They were. Kinda. I seem to remember it was said in one or two interviews (couldn't tell you which though), but according to their lore on the heavensward page it's still debated by scholars. And since we haven't seen any OTHER official lore to settle the matter definitively for us *cough*namingconventions*cough* one could speculate either way. Besides...they look rather draconic no? ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reishi

Why is everyone even stating them es reptilians? Dragons, sure, okay, I understand that, but (sorry, I didn't bother reading all 90 pages) weren't they confirmed to be more demonic than draconic?

---

I look at this this way- females have boobs. That is a mammalian thing. Mammals have mammary glands and nurse their young/give live birth. Reptiles don't have boobs, nor do birds. If dragons are not strictly reptilian but their own category (like the platypus or something) then that could be a thing. Demons could probably be anything though.

Naming conventions are up! No help with the dragon vs demon speculation though...

Loving the cultural blurbs on each tribe! Some even led by the itsy bitsy women, nice! Very nice indeed!

Based on their size, physical characteristics, habitat, and likely activity levels, I'd say the Au Ra are almost certainly endothermic (warm blooded). Ectotherm (cold blooded) animals tend to have restricted habitat ranges and activity levels based on local weather and temperatures since they depend on external heat sources. The naming guide specifically names a tribe, the Kagon, that are purely nocturnal. An active nocturnal nomadic lifestyle would be impossible for ectotherms.

On dragons, you could draw parallels with dinosaurs (another strain of extremely large reptile-like animals). There is currently some debate over whether dinosaurs were true endotherms (like their descendants the birds) or were mesotherms (a compromise between endo and ectothermy).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nataruma

Snip

---

I wonder how on earth the one tribe of just men hasn't decimated them yet seems like just too good of a target to not destroy entirely >.>

Some interesting (in my opinion anyways) things to note.

Wildlife of the steps includes horses, tigers, mammoths, and goats.

The horses seem large enough to be able to support the men considering that one tribe with horse spouses

There is at least one tribe who does practice selectivery breeding habits, though for some unknown reason only the men got tall.

The Xaela are pretty cool tbh, still not pleased with their women, but they seem culturally cool! Plus it even allows with some leeway tribe wise due to the 51 main tribes and other "hidden" ones.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nataruma

Loving the cultural blurbs on each tribe! Some even led by the itsy bitsy women, nice! Very nice indeed!

---

This sorta eliminates the "moe" I saw repeated constantly. Don't judge a book etc etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Samcaesar

I wonder how on earth the one tribe of just men hasn't decimated them yet seems like just too good of a target to not destroy entirely >.>

---

They're probably really good at shooting huge hulking targets from range, just saying ;)

I can appreciate a lot of imagination went into the write up of the Auri naming conventions, but ultimately, I feel the Xaela side is pretty gimmicky. A lot of those clan's snippets feel like they were chosen because they seemed interesting or provocative, not because they made any kind of cohesive sense. Certainly, history is filled with cultures with customs that most of us would find bizarre, so I don't take any issue with the fact that a lot of Xaelan clans are just downright weird. But those customs arise for reasons that, put in the context of that culture's history, are based in sound reasoning, if incomplete or bad information.

Let me present an example: the Borlaaq. They're the female exclusive ones that toss their male babies in the dumpster if you don't feel like going back to check. That's certainly an interesting and attention grabbing fact about that clan, but does it make sense? This is a clan that's continually embroiled in war against members of its own species. A species which exhibits some pretty extreme sexual dimorphism with the male half of the species clearly having the physical advantage. In what world does it make sense to discard your male children, leaving yourself with only women to fight? Oh, and cherry on top, they're cutting their numbers in half on top of it, seeing as most of the other clans seem to raise both their men and women to fight. Other cultures might be strange, but Christ, they're not *stupid*. Maybe, *maybe* you could dream up some context to make this make sense, but there's no way that snippet stands on its own.

And don't even get me started on the ones that marry horses. Though, this is Final Fantasy. Why horses and not chocobos?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Samcaesar

I wonder how on earth the one tribe of just men hasn't decimated them yet seems like just too good of a target to not destroy entirely >.>

---

If they evolved, culturally, to the point where they have survived alllll this time without being wiped out without a single man in the clan that would imply the men are the weak ones here. :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XLauncher

Snip

---

There are plenty of historical examples of tribes culling a certain sex of baby (mostly girls), because they are less useful to them, even though in the long run they still need the girls to keep the tribes going.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XLauncher

Let me present an example: the Borlaaq. They're the female exclusive ones that toss their male babies in the dumpster if you don't feel like going back to check. That's certainly an interesting and attention grabbing fact about that clan, but does it make sense? This is a clan that's continually embroiled in war against members of its own species.

---

Just going off what I recall from an admittedly quick read, I noticed a fair amount of clan descriptions referencing trade between clans, maybe as many or more than ones referencing combat. It seemed like mostly the largest clans were warring, and a good deal of the other clans had references to trading amongst each other, or several even covering their avoidance strategies. I don't think the initial idea that all Xaela clans are constantly warring with one another holds up with all the new info.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XLauncher

<snip>

---

There's another tribe that follows them around and are likely allied with them who adopt all the unwanted sons and raises them as their own.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XLauncher

And don't even get me started on the ones that marry horses. Though, this is Final Fantasy. Why horses and not chocobos?

---

Previous seasonal events have made a big deal out of the fact that chocobos are native to Eorzea specifically in XIV, and horses are native to Othard.

In fact, Domans call chocobos "horsebirds" and are quite confused by them and offended by their scent, lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XLauncher

I can appreciate a lot of imagination went into the write up of the Auri naming conventions, but ultimately, I feel the Xaela side is pretty gimmicky...

Let me present an example: the Borlaaq. They're the female exclusive ones that toss their male babies in the dumpster if you don't feel like going back to check...

And don't even get me started on the ones that marry horses. Though, this is Final Fantasy. Why horses and not chocobos?

---

The snippets about the clans are gimmicky, but that's probably just to distinguish them from each other. It can be assumed that aside from the custom in their snippet, Xaela clans are pretty similar and live nomadic, hunter-gatherer lifestyles unless their snippet says otherwise.

The Borlaaq are an "amazon warrior" tribe, but the Iriq adopt any "discarded" sons they have and raise them as their own. While it might not make much sense to discard half your children, especially given the males seem to have a distinct physical advantage, they might have elaborate reasons not included in their snippet.

Horses exist in XIV, but they're only native to Othard / Doma. Chocobos are just the Eorzean equivalent.

So, I'm wondering what the justification behind a Xaela retainer would be

"I heard this warrior of light person is really strong, and I want to become their apprentice" maybe?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kotori_Southburd

So, I'm wondering what the justification behind a Xaela retainer would be

"I heard this warrior of light person is really strong, and I want to become their apprentice" maybe?

---

If the Xaela is the opposit gender it might be,
"This WoL is said to be the strongest warrior in all of Hydaelyn. Surly a Child with said warrior would be even more powerful."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaiser-Ace

If the Xaela is the opposit gender it might be,
"This WoL is said to be the strongest warrior in all of Hydaelyn. Surly a Child with said warrior would be even more powerful."

---

Ah, no. Aside from the Olkund actively trying to increase their height, there is nothing stating any Xaela tribe engages in any form of eugenics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cilia

Ah, no. Aside from the Olkund actively trying to increase their height, there is nothing stating any Xaela tribe engages in any form of eugenics.

---

Not really Eugenics there, thats just chosing a powerful mate. Even wild animals IRL do that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaiser-Ace

Not really Eugenics there, thats just chosing a powerful mate. Even wild animals IRL do that.

---

Yeah it kinda is... mating based on the advantages it can give offspring is pretty much the definition of eugenics. Civilized peoples (even if they're nomads) typically don't engage in that.

The Xaela are not wild animals.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cilia

Yeah it kinda is... mating based on the advantages it can give offspring is pretty much the definition of eugenics. Civilized peoples (even if they're nomads) typically don't engage in that.

The Xaela are not wild animals.

---

No, but at least one tribe does practice it. The Olkund bred the really tall men specifically. And you could argue that the Borlaaq also do with abandoning the male children. So while it's not likely to be the case it could still be a motivation if you want to dig that deep.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cilia

Yeah it kinda is... mating based on the advantages it can give offspring is pretty much the definition of eugenics. Civilized peoples (even if they're nomads) typically don't engage in that.

The Xaela are not wild animals.

---

I thought Eugenics was what anchent Sparta did when they threw "weak" and deformed newborna from cliffs to ensure that they had a strong race?

Picking the best mate is just the natural order of which even humans arent immune too. And contrary to popular beliefe, alot of the modern world's problems are cause by ignoring that fact.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kytrin

No, but at least one tribe does practice it. The Olkund bred the really tall men specifically. And you could argue that the Borlaaq also do with abandoning the male children. So while it's not likely to be the case it could still be a motivation if you want to dig that deep.

---

If you want to go that far... yes, it's a possible motivation. Of course, the moviation for a retainer signing up to serve is entirely up to you, but I'd prefer not to bring eugenics into the equation and have my retainer coming on to me.

Why can't they just be sending some earned gil home, why does it always have to be about sex? Geez...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaiser-Ace

I thought Eugenics was what anchent Sparta did when they threw "weak" and deformed newborna from cliffs to ensure that they had a strong race?

Picking the best mate is just the natural order of which even humans arent immune too. And contrary to popular beliefe, alot of the modern world's problems are cause by ignoring that fact.

---

Yes, that is eugenics. It's also something people don't do in contemporary times.

Let's not get into the real-world implications of that, though. OK? Not the place or time, nor is it the most pleasant of conversations to be had.