Forums of the Megaverse®

No, not sexual intercourse. I'm talking about food-related predator-prey relations. Are intelligent predators (tigers, eagles, etc.) allowed to kill intelligent prey (sheep, chickens, rats, etc.) in a civilized society like Cardania, or is it considered murder?

What are acceptable food sources for large, meat-eating mutant animals in AtB? Are there industrial chicken factories or would the intelligent chickens rebel against their stupid "brothers" being considered a snack (cf. Rali's Free Rangers)?

Given how many voles/mice/small prey animals certain predators have to consume in a day just to survive, the number of prey consumed on regular basis - if taken in the aggregate and assuming intraspecies solidarity - would be considered a holocaust-scale massacre by prey animals, no?

I suppose the simplest explanation is that even mutant animals accept this as "the natural way" and are resigned to it, but a slightly funnier solution also occurred to me: the Cardanian government gives out rationing cards (literally, meal tickets) to predator species, which can then attack a quota of prey animals within their dietary range. Every time someone is "murdered" the investigating police officer checks the nutrition state of the predator, and if it is found to be in a state of hunger its ticket is stamped and they are allowed to haul off and eat the carcass. Forgery or tampering with the meal ticket is punishable by death.

Another solution would a weekly or monthly lottery in which prey species individuals are selected from a common pool to be "food this week". If they survive the week they can't be selected again, otherwise it's yummy yummy for some feline's tummy. The catch being that of course an intelligent mutant animal can defend itself by any means necessary, giving us the amusing situation of a tiger pouncing on a sheep only to get an AR-15 muzzle shoved into its face.

Now would that mean that predator and prey species that didn't like this arrangement would form their own neighbourhood defence forces or even separate nation-states? Would predators try to create oppressive dictatorships where prey species were kept like slaves and fed to their masters, or perhaps prey species would form communist-like collective societies where predators are neutered and forcibly converted to vegetarianism, eventually withering away from malnutrition? No doubt such societies would suffer from extreme overcrowding and would need to institute draconian birth control laws ala China's one-child policy.

pic related: http://www.abominable.cc/2011/01/19/worms-eye-view/

Over the years I found it easier just to say, large mutated bugs are the staple of diet for protein. And then ATB2 came along with the meat plants and made it easier to skirt the issue.

It's always been my take that not all animals of any given species. So while there may be mutant cows, there will also be 'dumb' cows. Would mutant cows eat dumb cows, no as they're herbivores. But would a mutant dog eat a 'dumb' dog? In general, no. But if it was the last thing you could eat, or face death, sure.

Adds an extra element for an adventure. Mutant animals are going missing, cows, pigs, sheep... are the Emrpire of Humanity to blame?

Sure, dumb insects and meat plants, but if I was a predator like a snake or lion, eating a stinkin' plant just wouldn't do it for me. Their entire bodily behaviour and psychology is oriented towards hunting, stalking, attacking, so it's not just a matter of feeding them protein in a sterile way. You know how felines have that involuntary grab reflex when something that was close to them moves rapidly away?

I think it would make social interactions in mutant animal societies more interesting, more fraught with calculations about possible backstabbing or positioning advantage. Also among party members.

As far as I'm concerned the typical animal instincts and behaviors are overcome by human traits in the mutation process.

Aww, that's so much less fun. Besides, some humans behave like animals anyway (pool sharks, hound dogs, weasels, etc.).

Re-read the AtB2 alignment descriptions. It very specifically says that those of good alignment would never hunt/eat sentient mutants for food.

Diabolic Evil on the other hand, they'd prefer their prey be sentient.

Another thing to remember, unless you take the dietary restriction vestigial disadvantage available to your species you are considered omnivorous, like a human. So your mutant Deer may very well enjoy a bacon sandwich for breakfast, and your mutant Wolf may choose to have a salad for lunch.

Of course that's going by the book. In your own campaign feel free to do it any way you want.

Mechanurgist wrote:Aww, that's so much less fun.

I've seen it ruin campaigns. There are allot of RPG players out there that suddenly turn into the school yard bully when given half a chance.

And Fubarious, I think that was why he put in the meat potato...to skirt the whole issue.

Good points about the alignments and the vestigial diet disadvantages. I guess most people, including Erick, pictured mutant animals more like humans in animal skins, whereas I'm thinking from the other direction as animals with more human-like bodies who happened to get smart but are still animals at heart.

As for bullies ruining campaigns, yes, it depends on player maturity. But bullying behaviour occurs with or without predator-prey situations. A good group could turn food pyramid social tensions into a riveting source of drama.

I tend to keep things more simple than that. Mutant Tiger can't control himself and kills a mutant Sheep, he get's charged with murder of a fellow sentient by the local comunity. Treated no differently than if a Sheep murdered another Sheep for some other reason. Starvation is a non-issue since I never go with an all mutant planet. Still plenty of wild and domesticated non-mutants (or non-sentient mutants of assorted variety) either to be hunted or farmed. This is also going by the book since there are multiple mentions of non-sentient animals in both the skill and mutant psionics sections, as well as being outright stated in the random encounter tables.

A mark as proof of sentience is a good idea. Though I've always considered that those who live their entire lives in a society of sentient and non-sentient mutants would learn to be able to tell the difference. I covered it a bit in a story I wrote...
viewtopic.php?f=12&t=99183&p=1918111#p1918111

In it I also added a bit of cultural short hand to distinguish between talking about a sentient mutant, and just a simple (though possibly mutated in some way) animal; a subtle use of capitalization. And yes, I stole this idea from Gregory Maguire (author of Wicked, which you should read if you haven't). Basically, a pig is a dumb animal from which we get tasty bacon, a Pig is your next door neighbor and would find being called bacon rather insulting. You can tell the difference in vocal speech if you're careful, the capitalized version tends to be emphasized a bit harder. Now a Cow with out the vestigial diet restrictions would have a human-like omnivorous diet, and could possibly have a herd of pigs in a pen for use as a food source. Though I generally avoided having Pigs owning a herd of pigs, or Cows raising a herd of cows for meat (though for dairy could be OK), since butchering an animal that could be a direct ancestor could get a little weird.

Yes, as competitors within the same ecological niche, not as a food source.

I've approached this issue (and addressed it elsewhere) this way. My mutant mountain lion with diet carnivore will not kill another sentient mutant [i][u]in order to eat it[u][i]. He will however kill another sentient mutant, or anything/anyone honestly, in defense of his own (or groups) life/safety. Once the adversary is dead, it stops becoming another sentient being and is now a potential food source. He didn't kill them in order to eat them, but now that they're killed they'll be eaten.

I also use the threat of death/consumption to dissuade potential adversaries. Sadly it hasn't ever worked (I have no idea what the GM is thinking running npc's as suicidal, but it's getting kind of old).

The following is actual game dialogue (as best I can recall).

[i]GM: There is a rustle in the underbrush and you find yourself surrounded by (rolls dice) mutant chipmunks. They are tiny, only about 3 feet tall and have little miniature pistols pointed at you. One of them steps forward and tells you this is a stick up and to hand over all your goods.

Me (the mutant mountain lion): I take a big sniff through my nose and tell the leader/group, "I've got your scent now boys. Hassling me and my buddy might be the stupidest idea you've ever had. If you keep this up, I'm gonna kill and eat everyone of you. Then I'm gonna follow your scent back to wherever you come from and I'm gonna kill and eat everyone you know. Everywhere I track your scent, that person get's killed and eaten. The choice is yours, you can walk away and we'll forget all about this. Or... Well, I done told you what'd happen."

GM: Initiative [i]

Just so there is no misunderstanding, many many chipmunks died that day.

duck-foot wrote:

Fubarius wrote:I tend to keep things more simple than that. Mutant Tiger can't control himself and kills a mutant Sheep, he get's charged with murder of a fellow sentient by the local comunity. Treated no differently than if a Sheep murdered another Sheep for some other reason. Starvation is a non-issue since I never go with an all mutant planet. Still plenty of wild and domesticated non-mutants (or non-sentient mutants of assorted variety) either to be hunted or farmed. This is also going by the book since there are multiple mentions of non-sentient animals in both the skill and mutant psionics sections, as well as being outright stated in the random encounter tables.

there is a thought a carnovorous sheep

read kevin and Kell...
Its a web comic you may find humorous

actually the more I read this thread... the more I think everyone would benefit from reading Kevin and Kell...
START HERE

actually, i'd suggest 21st Century Fox and the spinoff "Carry on"
those comics are closer to how ATB would work, since they have alternative foodstuffs and more 'normal' lifestyles.
(those two comics are done by a husband/wife team.. and share a setting)

one of the more creative approaches brought up in the latter comic is the nature of being a mortician in a world of sentient animals.. basically instead of embalming (which temporarily preserves the body prior to burial/creamation), it would be more like taxidermy.. the edible bits are removed and processed for consumtion, and the rest used to make the body look lifelike for the viewing and burial.

of course, in after the bomb, not all animals changed..

this is a repost of a discussion from an older thread..

glitterboy2098 wrote:

Rali wrote:I'm surprised that so many people think that all animal/insect life on the planet was mutated. I'm pretty sure it was mentioned near the beginning of the First Edition book that only a small percentage of animals were affected. Unfortunately, I don't have a copy of First Edition AtB on hand to quote from.

I do have a copy of 2nd Edition AtB with me though.

2nd Edition AtB, pg 164 wrote:Some animals were affected as well. About 25% of all primates, and 10% of mammals, as well as 2% of other creatures...Of those animals affected, most died, but about a third seemed to mutate as they recovered, gaining human traits.

At first it seemed that most of the surviving animals were unaffected. It wasn't until the next generation was born, that the extent of the plague was completely realized. The manufactured disease...was also infecting the offspring of many mammals, birds, reptiles and amphibians, as well as a few fish, crustaceans and insects.

As you can see, only a very small percentage of animals were infected with the mutagen disease in the 2nd Edition setting.

correct. which means 75% of primates, 90% of all other mammals, and 98% of all other creatures were left uneffected.

and of those infected, 2/3rds just died.

hmm....trying to remember my division of fractions here...

so thats:
8.25% of primates mutated
3.33 of other mammals mutated
0.66% of non-mammals mutated
16.75% of primates died
6.667% of other mammals died
1.334% of non-mammals died
75% of primates were uneffected
90% of other mammals were uneffected
98% of non-mammals were uneffected

this is the toll for the mutagen plague. the nuclear war would screw up these numbers. nukes are an indescriminate killer, but because they were targeted at cities, bases, ect, would not really have a major impact on the unurbanized regions. and nature tends to reassert it's influence on places with vigor, so any losses in the unaltered animals would generally be replaced pretty quick.


so the world of ATB is one we would recognise, with birds in the trees, insects on the ground, cattle herds roaming the fields.....we'd never know we had left our world until we find a city ruin, or run into an anthromorphic animal...

this would change the dynamics a lot.. you wouldn't have to eat a sapient being to survive as a carnivore, you could get by just fine on regular animals. while there might be some emotional overlap (with mutant versions of some animals being upset to see the non-mutant versions hunted and killed), the moral side of things is a little more safe.

which is why i suggest those two comics.. they downplay the whole 'eating people' bit for the most part, though mainly by not focusing on it. Kevin and Kell throws the moral ambiguity issue at you full bore due to the main female character's job.

glitterboy2098 wrote:actually, i'd suggest 21st Century Fox and the spinoff "Carry on"
those comics are closer to how ATB would work, since they have alternative foodstuffs and more 'normal' lifestyles.
(those two comics are done by a husband/wife team.. and share a setting)

one of the more creative approaches brought up in the latter comic is the nature of being a mortician in a world of sentient animals.. basically instead of embalming (which temporarily preserves the body prior to burial/creamation), it would be more like taxidermy.. the edible bits are removed and processed for consumtion, and the rest used to make the body look lifelike for the viewing and burial.

of course, in after the bomb, not all animals changed..

this is a repost of a discussion from an older thread..

glitterboy2098 wrote:

Rali wrote:I'm surprised that so many people think that all animal/insect life on the planet was mutated. I'm pretty sure it was mentioned near the beginning of the First Edition book that only a small percentage of animals were affected. Unfortunately, I don't have a copy of First Edition AtB on hand to quote from.

I do have a copy of 2nd Edition AtB with me though.

2nd Edition AtB, pg 164 wrote:Some animals were affected as well. About 25% of all primates, and 10% of mammals, as well as 2% of other creatures...Of those animals affected, most died, but about a third seemed to mutate as they recovered, gaining human traits.

At first it seemed that most of the surviving animals were unaffected. It wasn't until the next generation was born, that the extent of the plague was completely realized. The manufactured disease...was also infecting the offspring of many mammals, birds, reptiles and amphibians, as well as a few fish, crustaceans and insects.

As you can see, only a very small percentage of animals were infected with the mutagen disease in the 2nd Edition setting.

correct. which means 75% of primates, 90% of all other mammals, and 98% of all other creatures were left uneffected.

and of those infected, 2/3rds just died.

hmm....trying to remember my division of fractions here...

so thats:
8.25% of primates mutated
3.33 of other mammals mutated
0.66% of non-mammals mutated
16.75% of primates died
6.667% of other mammals died
1.334% of non-mammals died
75% of primates were uneffected
90% of other mammals were uneffected
98% of non-mammals were uneffected

this is the toll for the mutagen plague. the nuclear war would screw up these numbers. nukes are an indescriminate killer, but because they were targeted at cities, bases, ect, would not really have a major impact on the unurbanized regions. and nature tends to reassert it's influence on places with vigor, so any losses in the unaltered animals would generally be replaced pretty quick.


so the world of ATB is one we would recognise, with birds in the trees, insects on the ground, cattle herds roaming the fields.....we'd never know we had left our world until we find a city ruin, or run into an anthromorphic animal...

this would change the dynamics a lot.. you wouldn't have to eat a sapient being to survive as a carnivore, you could get by just fine on regular animals. while there might be some emotional overlap (with mutant versions of some animals being upset to see the non-mutant versions hunted and killed), the moral side of things is a little more safe.

which is why i suggest those two comics.. they downplay the whole 'eating people' bit for the most part, though mainly by not focusing on it. Kevin and Kell throws the moral ambiguity issue at you full bore due to the main female character's job.

dont forget the moral issues of inter-species couples, the "big disease" domestication, and in the case of one character cross-species dietary habits (a predator becomes a full fledged ruminant through surgery).

given that Kevin and Kell uses 'magic genetics' so that any pairing can produce kids, even between widely different species, the inter-species couples thing doesn't really work when trying to take its lessons for ATB.

whereas in 21st century fox (21CF) and carry on, normal genetics apply.. interspecies couples that aren't genetically compatible have to seek medical assistance, or resort to various forms of surrogate parent methods. [link]. you also see plenty of species-ist type sentiments by a few types as a result.. expies of human rascism, to varying degrees. seperation based on diet is there, but it isn't as big a deal as shows up in Kevin and kell, where you basically have two seperate societies that happen to share a geographic location, and Diet is used as a metaphor for Human rascism and to a degree sexuality.

and kevin and kell treats Domestication like a communicable illness, as opposed to being a selected for physical trait. in 21CF domestication isn't a factor, but the domesticated species exist and behave more or less like you'd expect. pretty much similar to ATB. there are also some examples of how a society of different animals would develop culturally. Carry on has some Sheep society elements to it (including herd based religion!) for example, or 21CF's Lions.

and to be honest, when in ATB have you had a predator species that had a herbivores digestive system, or vice versa?

i like Kevin and Kell, and it is a great comic. but it just doesn't map well with the basic physical rules of the ATB setting to be much of a help. 21CF and Carry On are a bit closer, and deal with the issue in a less direct fashion while also illustrating some of the moral, ethical, even legal issues with predation of intelligent beings.. something Kevin and Kell largely ignores.

21CF also gets into alternative food sources.. with its S.P.A.M., Scientifically Produced Animal Matter.. basically undifferentiated cloned tissues grown in vats and given artificial flavors. the rough parallels with ATB's meat-potato should be obvious.


plus, 21CF and Carry on don't have the uber sized archives of kevin and kell.. which makes it easier to read and use as inspiration.

Mechanurgist wrote:No, not sexual intercourse. I'm talking about food-related predator-prey relations. Are intelligent predators (tigers, eagles, etc.) allowed to kill intelligent prey (sheep, chickens, rats, etc.) in a civilized society like Cardania, or is it considered murder?

What are acceptable food sources for large, meat-eating mutant animals in AtB? Are there industrial chicken factories or would the intelligent chickens rebel against their stupid "brothers" being considered a snack (cf. Rali's Free Rangers)?

Given how many voles/mice/small prey animals certain predators have to consume in a day just to survive, the number of prey consumed on regular basis - if taken in the aggregate and assuming intraspecies solidarity - would be considered a holocaust-scale massacre by prey animals, no?

I suppose the simplest explanation is that even mutant animals accept this as "the natural way" and are resigned to it, but a slightly funnier solution also occurred to me: the Cardanian government gives out rationing cards (literally, meal tickets) to predator species, which can then attack a quota of prey animals within their dietary range. Every time someone is "murdered" the investigating police officer checks the nutrition state of the predator, and if it is found to be in a state of hunger its ticket is stamped and they are allowed to haul off and eat the carcass. Forgery or tampering with the meal ticket is punishable by death.

Another solution would a weekly or monthly lottery in which prey species individuals are selected from a common pool to be "food this week". If they survive the week they can't be selected again, otherwise it's yummy yummy for some feline's tummy. The catch being that of course an intelligent mutant animal can defend itself by any means necessary, giving us the amusing situation of a tiger pouncing on a sheep only to get an AR-15 muzzle shoved into its face.

Now would that mean that predator and prey species that didn't like this arrangement would form their own neighbourhood defence forces or even separate nation-states? Would predators try to create oppressive dictatorships where prey species were kept like slaves and fed to their masters, or perhaps prey species would form communist-like collective societies where predators are neutered and forcibly converted to vegetarianism, eventually withering away from malnutrition? No doubt such societies would suffer from extreme overcrowding and would need to institute draconian birth control laws ala China's one-child policy.

This has come up a number of times before. There is a quite simple answer to it. "In the world of ATB, insects have mutated larger and largely take on the roles of pack animals(Like oxen, and horses, not pack as in wolves) and food animals" A bug the size of a cow, feeds about as many people as a cow does. Mutants down under have special oocs which are bug cowboys (Jackaroos or Jillaroos) And have riding insects that they use as horses. In the (old)USA for some reason they say that riding bugs hasn't cought on quite as much (Which makes no sense) but you still see it. In one of the adventures in the book an old dog mutant is riding a beetle. There's also mentions, if you dig, about them herding insects.

Those are for 'non intelligent' insects. Basically giant bugs the size of cows or elephants.

There's also the "Meat plant" You can find it in the back of the ATB book. A left over of the golden age of genetics, the plant rapidly grows 'meat' roasts, that are infused with protean, and 'tastes' like meat. The price they have for them are common and they grow alarmingly fast. (They also have gasoline vines. Wheee!)

That's the 'book answers' for you. The Predators are expected to ether eat unintelligent bugs, or subside on meat plants and such. After all, humans are carnivores but we ((Usually)) Don't look at our neighbors as quick sources of BBQ.

The more interesting question is: "What if a mutant, had all of his BIO-E points tied up in psionics or something, so he looks like a 'normal, non mutated cow" and yet is just as intelligent as a mutant cow with full biped, hands, looks, and speech? What happens if a predator eats THAT, thinking it's a (dumb) animal

Mechanurgist wrote:Sure, dumb insects and meat plants, but if I was a predator like a snake or lion, eating a stinkin' plant just wouldn't do it for me. Their entire bodily behaviour and psychology is oriented towards hunting, stalking, attacking, so it's not just a matter of feeding them protein in a sterile way. You know how felines have that involuntary grab reflex when something that was close to them moves rapidly away?

I think it would make social interactions in mutant animal societies more interesting, more fraught with calculations about possible backstabbing or positioning advantage. Also among party members.

In a way ATB2 has this in it. In the disadvantages you can get strict diets, or predator brain, or prey brain, etc. But they're taken as disadvantages, meaning most of the mutants can 'think' like humans even if they're quirky. those with the Disadvantages, their instincts are stronger and harder to resist.

glitterboy2098 wrote:actually, i'd suggest 21st Century Fox and the spinoff "Carry on"
those comics are closer to how ATB would work, since they have alternative foodstuffs and more 'normal' lifestyles.
(those two comics are done by a husband/wife team.. and share a setting)

one of the more creative approaches brought up in the latter comic is the nature of being a mortician in a world of sentient animals.. basically instead of embalming (which temporarily preserves the body prior to burial/creamation), it would be more like taxidermy.. the edible bits are removed and processed for consumtion, and the rest used to make the body look lifelike for the viewing and burial.

of course, in after the bomb, not all animals changed..

this is a repost of a discussion from an older thread..

glitterboy2098 wrote:

Rali wrote:I'm surprised that so many people think that all animal/insect life on the planet was mutated. I'm pretty sure it was mentioned near the beginning of the First Edition book that only a small percentage of animals were affected. Unfortunately, I don't have a copy of First Edition AtB on hand to quote from.

I do have a copy of 2nd Edition AtB with me though.

2nd Edition AtB, pg 164 wrote:Some animals were affected as well. About 25% of all primates, and 10% of mammals, as well as 2% of other creatures...Of those animals affected, most died, but about a third seemed to mutate as they recovered, gaining human traits.

At first it seemed that most of the surviving animals were unaffected. It wasn't until the next generation was born, that the extent of the plague was completely realized. The manufactured disease...was also infecting the offspring of many mammals, birds, reptiles and amphibians, as well as a few fish, crustaceans and insects.

As you can see, only a very small percentage of animals were infected with the mutagen disease in the 2nd Edition setting.

correct. which means 75% of primates, 90% of all other mammals, and 98% of all other creatures were left uneffected.

and of those infected, 2/3rds just died.

hmm....trying to remember my division of fractions here...

so thats:
8.25% of primates mutated
3.33 of other mammals mutated
0.66% of non-mammals mutated
16.75% of primates died
6.667% of other mammals died
1.334% of non-mammals died
75% of primates were uneffected
90% of other mammals were uneffected
98% of non-mammals were uneffected

this is the toll for the mutagen plague. the nuclear war would screw up these numbers. nukes are an indescriminate killer, but because they were targeted at cities, bases, ect, would not really have a major impact on the unurbanized regions. and nature tends to reassert it's influence on places with vigor, so any losses in the unaltered animals would generally be replaced pretty quick.


so the world of ATB is one we would recognise, with birds in the trees, insects on the ground, cattle herds roaming the fields.....we'd never know we had left our world until we find a city ruin, or run into an anthromorphic animal...

this would change the dynamics a lot.. you wouldn't have to eat a sapient being to survive as a carnivore, you could get by just fine on regular animals. while there might be some emotional overlap (with mutant versions of some animals being upset to see the non-mutant versions hunted and killed), the moral side of things is a little more safe.

which is why i suggest those two comics.. they downplay the whole 'eating people' bit for the most part, though mainly by not focusing on it. Kevin and Kell throws the moral ambiguity issue at you full bore due to the main female character's job.

That's interesting, but doesn't take into account generations of breeding of the mutants with their new longer lifespans. (Considered equal to humans)

Sure if only 10% of mammals mutated that'd leave 90, but then those 10% bred and begot more and more and more. Clearly the mutant animal populations have not approached today's humans. (In-fact if you go strictly by the book they are startlingly small).

Typically I run my games as in the 'people' you interact with are mostly mutant animals, but there are non mutated ones out there. They're looked on, like we look at Lemurs. Cute, furry animals in the same family that we 'evolved' from. (I skipped great apes, because to Mutant animals they likely would be on 'this side' of the divide, if you know what I mean)

(Small note. I see that many of my 'answers' had been covered at least in part further down in the thread. Still. I'd typed them in the order that I found them. Please forgive the recap. Hopefully my posts weren't totally useless and offered a bit of insight or detail)

Pepsi Jedi wrote:That's interesting, but doesn't take into account generations of breeding of the mutants with their new longer lifespans. (Considered equal to humans)

Sure if only 10% of mammals mutated that'd leave 90, but then those 10% bred and begot more and more and more. Clearly the mutant animal populations have not approached today's humans. (In-fact if you go strictly by the book they are startlingly small).

mutant animal populations might have grown, but so would the non-mutant wildlife populations. and the non-mutant wildlife began with a much larger population to begin with. so you can have a 'food that talks is not food" attitude and still survive without resorting to meat substitutes like giant bugs or the meatpotato. people could still non-mutant raise cattle, sheep, goats, etc. for their meat, fur, and skins.. though obviously there could be some social issues with certain mutated species over it, much like how some humans dislike the idea of Chimpanzees and Gorilla's being consumed/tested on, while still classifying them as 'animals.'

in terms of interpersonal relationships, a mutant having.. affairs.. with a non mutant should be as disturbing and socially unacceptable as a human in the same situation in real life.
whether a mutant animal and a human would qualify for the same taboo? up to the GM, but i'd suspect that the answer should be "yes", but with the qualifier that it would be more readily seen as more acceptable by some, since both are intelligent beings. certainly in any locations where relations of that sort between two different species of mutant animal occur and are more or less accepted, a mutant animal and a human shouldn't be treated differently.

Don't forget there's also indications that some mutants in the setting still do hold ..... ties to non mutant animals or even the giant bugs. The Free Cattle for example don't let people ride animals or bugs, they see it as an affort to the centuries of slavery and useage as riding beasts before the bomb. In the same adventure where you see indication of mutant animals riding giant insects (Chem? Clem? The dog in the overalls) There's indications that the Free Cattle horse I think it was, saw that as a huge affront.

So such opinions would be vaired depending on background, upbringing and part of the world.

Aussie mutants see riding insects as awesome mounts and companions. Herding bugs for a living. Free Cattle see the riding of another animal or mutant as an almost religous affront. Road Hogs or those in the West might just see it as quaint.

When you move past it to start in on "Eating" other animals.. That's going to vary by location as well but I have to think that just going out and hunting is going to be tricky. Again, what if you come upon a cow. Looks like a normal not mutated cow. Smells like one. Standing there chewing her cud. You spring and pounce on it and eat it. Suddenly the local lawman is pressing a shot gun to the back our head and charges you with murder.

You go to trial (Lets say this town has the rule of law) and you go "Dude. I just ate a cow. It wasn't doing higher math or even picking it's nose. That was a 'food cow'."

The Judge, a mutated pig slams his hoof/hand on the bench and glares at you. "That wasn't 'just a cow' that was Bessy. Our beloved Mayor and FOUNDER of this town! She brought us up from nothing! Saved the lives of most everyone here!"

And you shake your head and you're all "Dude. I'm telling you. That was hamburger! Not Hours! Dumb cow was just standing in the field!!"

And the judge slams his hoof/hand again "Bessy's mutation was in the mind. In the intellect. She was brilliant. She was kind. She communicated via psionics, and she looked out for us all. She was the heart of this community and the best being I have ever met! She liked to go out to that field and quietly commune with nature. She liked chewing the grass and thinking of all her calves. She showed you no harm. No threat. You killed her in cold blood................. Then.................. like the disgusting creature you are.... You.... ATE HER!!

You're going to HANG!"


And... You're as guilty as the day is long. All you thought you were doing was getting a snack, in reality you killed their beloved mayor, founder and savior of the town.

As for sex? (I see no reason to beat around the bush. Anyone old/smart enough to know what sex is, isn't going to be fooled by *Cough cough '"""Relations""" Cough*) I would see it as being rather open. "Do what you will, as long as it doesn't hurt anyone" Two beings of different origins are not going to reproduce, So it's very safe sex. (Barring glaring physical mismatches)

There is indication of some beings that are racist about it. I think some of the swine, and pure breeds ate like this, but they're the exception, not the rule.

Lemme tell ya. Somone at Palladium LOOOOOVES their farm animals. We have more stats for cows and pigs and horses and chickens than we do all the other animals put together and doubled. Even the new article in the rifter a few issues back. New animals from Britton, ended up being another barn yard with a couple of dogs tossed on top. Sheesh.

Pepsi Jedi wrote:As for sex? (I see no reason to beat around the bush. Anyone old/smart enough to know what sex is, isn't going to be fooled by *Cough cough '"""Relations""" Cough*) I would see it as being rather open. "Do what you will, as long as it doesn't hurt anyone" Two beings of different origins are not going to reproduce, So it's very safe sex. (Barring glaring physical mismatches)

There is indication of some beings that are racist about it. I think some of the swine, and pure breeds ate like this, but they're the exception, not the rule.

Lemme tell ya. Somone at Palladium LOOOOOVES their farm animals. We have more stats for cows and pigs and horses and chickens than we do all the other animals put together and doubled. Even the new article in the rifter a few issues back. New animals from Britton, ended up being another barn yard with a couple of dogs tossed on top. Sheesh.

That gives the following a WHOLE new meaning.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WqNMjZpSbnU

Well... kinda not.. that was kinda the point then too. *Wince*

Mechanurgist wrote:No, not sexual intercourse.

But that's social relations too Kevin basically advertised it for dogs + cats

Mechanurgist wrote:I'm talking about food-related predator-prey relations. Are intelligent predators (tigers, eagles, etc.) allowed to kill intelligent prey (sheep, chickens, rats, etc.) in a civilized society like Cardania, or is it considered murder?

I'm not sure but the web comic "Kevin and Kell" has an interesting take on how society could function even if you were allowed to.

glitterboy2098 wrote:actually, i'd suggest 21st Century Fox and the spinoff "Carry on"
those comics are closer to how ATB would work, since they have alternative foodstuffs and more 'normal' lifestyles.
(those two comics are done by a husband/wife team.. and share a setting)

one of the more creative approaches brought up in the latter comic is the nature of being a mortician in a world of sentient animals.. basically instead of embalming (which temporarily preserves the body prior to burial/creamation), it would be more like taxidermy.. the edible bits are removed and processed for consumtion, and the rest used to make the body look lifelike for the viewing and burial.

of course, in after the bomb, not all animals changed..

this is a repost of a discussion from an older thread..

glitterboy2098 wrote:

Rali wrote:I'm surprised that so many people think that all animal/insect life on the planet was mutated. I'm pretty sure it was mentioned near the beginning of the First Edition book that only a small percentage of animals were affected. Unfortunately, I don't have a copy of First Edition AtB on hand to quote from.

I do have a copy of 2nd Edition AtB with me though.

2nd Edition AtB, pg 164 wrote:Some animals were affected as well. About 25% of all primates, and 10% of mammals, as well as 2% of other creatures...Of those animals affected, most died, but about a third seemed to mutate as they recovered, gaining human traits.

At first it seemed that most of the surviving animals were unaffected. It wasn't until the next generation was born, that the extent of the plague was completely realized. The manufactured disease...was also infecting the offspring of many mammals, birds, reptiles and amphibians, as well as a few fish, crustaceans and insects.

As you can see, only a very small percentage of animals were infected with the mutagen disease in the 2nd Edition setting.

correct. which means 75% of primates, 90% of all other mammals, and 98% of all other creatures were left uneffected.

and of those infected, 2/3rds just died.

hmm....trying to remember my division of fractions here...

so thats:
8.25% of primates mutated
3.33 of other mammals mutated
0.66% of non-mammals mutated
16.75% of primates died
6.667% of other mammals died
1.334% of non-mammals died
75% of primates were uneffected
90% of other mammals were uneffected
98% of non-mammals were uneffected

this is the toll for the mutagen plague. the nuclear war would screw up these numbers. nukes are an indescriminate killer, but because they were targeted at cities, bases, ect, would not really have a major impact on the unurbanized regions. and nature tends to reassert it's influence on places with vigor, so any losses in the unaltered animals would generally be replaced pretty quick.


so the world of ATB is one we would recognise, with birds in the trees, insects on the ground, cattle herds roaming the fields.....we'd never know we had left our world until we find a city ruin, or run into an anthromorphic animal...

this would change the dynamics a lot.. you wouldn't have to eat a sapient being to survive as a carnivore, you could get by just fine on regular animals. while there might be some emotional overlap (with mutant versions of some animals being upset to see the non-mutant versions hunted and killed), the moral side of things is a little more safe.

which is why i suggest those two comics.. they downplay the whole 'eating people' bit for the most part, though mainly by not focusing on it. Kevin and Kell throws the moral ambiguity issue at you full bore due to the main female character's job.

As an aside. I thought I'd revist this. It looks impressive but it fails to grasp the situation.

The statement "which means 75% of primates, 90% of all other mammals, and 98% of all other creatures were left uneffected"

Isn't 100% accurate. Rather it's accurate when "The Crash" happened. Which is well and good but it ingores the rest of the section. 25% of primates 10% of Mammals and 2% of others were affected by the Crash virus and showed symptoms at that time. A third of those mutated when they got better which would imply small numbers of mutated animals.


If you read on though you get the full impact. "At first it seemed that most of the surviving animals were unaffected. It wasn't until the next generation was born, that the extent of the plague was completely realized. The manufactured disease...was also infecting the offspring of many mammals, birds, reptiles and amphibians, as well as a few fish, crustaceans and insects."

Those numbers were for 'normal' animals that contracted the virus and mutated as a result. Think... The Ninja Turtles were normal turtles till they came in contact with the ooze and were mutated.

The 'next' generation, the 'normal' animals offspring came out mutated.

This doesn't mean ALL future animals came out mutated, but it does say that many did. This puts numerical projections out the window.

We don't know if "Many" means 20%.. 40%... 60%... 80%...

Personally I think that it'd come down about half. But that's me.

So the "Mutated animals only make up 2-25% of all animals" Thing isn't quite right. That was just the percentage that mutated as all the humans were dieing off.

The "First Generation Past the Crash" let the 'full extent of the plague be realized' as 'normal' animals gave birth to mutant animals.

well, the point was to illustrate that only a small portion of the animal populations of earth even got the illness, and that there are still lots of non-mutant stuff out there. making it very probable that people still can raise and eat cows, goats, sheep, etc without having to deal with the issue of eating thinking people.

glitterboy2098 wrote:well, the point was to illustrate that only a small portion of the animal populations of earth even got the illness, and that there are still lots of non-mutant stuff out there. making it very probable that people still can raise and eat cows, goats, sheep, etc without having to deal with the issue of eating thinking people.

But it doesn't actually point that out. It points out that when the Virus went live and killed off most of the humans, a small portion of the animals showed symptoms and mutated as a result of 'catching and being symptomatic'

The first generation past the plague, the animals that people thought did not get it, had it, and birthed Mutant animals. They were asymptomatic till they bred, and were shown to have been infected as well as their offspring were mutants. We don't know the percentage of that, just the indication that it was 'many' and that the full extent of the plague, as pertaining to animals, was not known till that secondary event. (Births of Mutants to animals that didn't show symptoms themselves)

There's indication that Mutant animals still 'relate' with their fore bearers as well. The Free Plains mutants for example are militant about even bugs being ridden or used for labor.

I don't think a mutant pig is going to be chill if you are munching a ham sammich and wearing "BACON IS MY FAVORITE FOOD" Teeshirt.

A couple of years ago ( 2007-2008 )I was running a game. I had made one of the villians a mutant cow (a bull) with the ability to control other cows, He had a Spanish accent and called the heroes called him "The Cowmander". He was working for the major baddie and the heroes needed to stop his nefarious deeds. So after the heroes get to fight him and kill a heard of cattle he simply gives up.. They all sit down at dinner where steak is severed and they never caught on that he ate meat and in fact he was a canabal or a "Canabull" if you will. Now in the rules herbervoes eat plants I know but have you heard of mad cow disease ? It was concluded Mad Cow Disease was caused by cattle, which are normally herbivores, being fed the remains of other cattle in the form of meat and bone meal that had it.

Actually in the rules, it states that while many mutant animals may start as carnivores or herbivores that due to the mutation and such they mostly end up as Omnivores like humans.

"Pure' Carnivores, or Herbivores only happen when you take the "Disadvantage" during Character creation. (( or make a conscious choice IC))

If we're not supposed to eat the npc's the GM shouldn't make them out of food! lol

It's stated pretty well under the allignments what a mutant animal will do about cannibalism.
That said, it's always been amusing to me when you've got carnivores and herbivores (by type), and say a mutant wolf eats a deer in front of the mutant deer, who gets a bit nonplussed...

http://www.kevinandkell.com/1995/kk0907.html

=)