What is the difference between a furry race and a beastfolk race?

The difference is that the "beastfolk" term was made up by you not to look like a giant furry.

What's the difference between a good furry and a bad furry?

>Good furry
Doesn't make it constantly obvious that he jacks it to animal people.

>Bad furry
Makes it constantly obvious he jacks it to animal people.

You will be able to find a bad one quickly.

The good ones you won't find.

whether it lives or is dead

the term beastfolk is old as shit and existed before the FILTHY FURRIES stole it and started oversexualizing the race

>What is the difference between a furry race and a beastfolk race?
Presence of an assburger at your table.
>Can a beastfolk race be sexy and not be furry?
Depending on whether you have an assburger at your table.

That's all there is to it. Nine times out of ten, anthropomorphic animals are not problematic because of a tail-wearing creep that masturbates under the table, but because a social retard you're playing with will nuke the game in righteous indignation over perceived furries.

Furry is an art style nothing more.

Generally speaking:
Good Anthropomorphic design = Beastfolk

Bad Anthropomorphic design = Furry

While there are characters in the grey area between there are certain design traits which tend to be stereotypical of "furry".

Fur that is an un-natural colour is often a solid warning sign though the rest of the design can save it.

The big one to me at least is the retarded "disney eyes" and over the top impossible facial expressions though.

Though to make things even more difficult some really talented artists can make even the most stereotypical furry design look cool, those people are evil.

...

...

The difference is that beastfolk races are portrayed as just normal races for the setting, whilst furry races are portrayed as ERP races.

Really, for all the memes, that's what it boils down to; it's not the race being anthropomorphic, it's the race being magical realmed - forcing sexual aspects into the player's faces despite their discomfort, that Veeky Forums hates them for.

you have to be an insecure faggot if you think every anthropomorphic animal character is made specifically to appeal to fursuit fetish fuckers

A member of a furry race is an anthropomorphic animal person with a thick knotted dick. A member of a beastfolk race is an anthropomorphic animal person with a thick knotted dick, but everyone agrees to call them a beastfolk and maybe not talk about the knotted dick

Never really got the point of that image.

More or less. It's subjective of course but a good rule of thumb is to ask yourself whether the beast race brings anything to the setting that humans couldn't or if they are just people with animal heads and tails.

To take OP's picture as an example, the Skaven in Warhammer are not furries. They represent the traditional negative depictions of rats who spread diseases, eat food stores, devour the dead and breed exponentially. The beastmen from the same setting also stand for the flesh-eating minotaurs and centaurs of mythology.

On the other hand, the Pandaren, Worgen and Tauren from Warcraft are arguably furries. They were obviously created for the sole purpose of allowing players to play as an anthro wolf or panda.

>What is the difference between a furry race and a beastfolk race?

None. Kill them all. Kill the people who play them.

>Can a beastfolk race be sexy and not be furry?

No. Kill them all. Kill the people who think that animals or anything even remotely like an animal could ever be "sexy".

Mind you, since the "classic" D&D races can just as easily be summed up as people with funny looks (tall and magical, short and grumpy, small and goofy, small and fat), no need to be TOO stringent about that.

All furries are beastfolk, but not all beastfolk are furries.

You forgot to post a picture of an angry space marine shooting at something.

I would argue that Tauren are not furry.
(though female tauren kinda are)

Pathfinder Kitsune RAW are furry as fuck, not anime girls with fox ears and fluffy tails.

But they have disguise and illusion bullshit, so I let it slide.

It's true, although at this point elves, dwarves, hobbits and gnomes are such staples of fantasy that it almost feels weird to not include them. Regarding beast races, I guess it depends on how their inclusion is justified in-setting. If a town has humans living side by side with wolf or lion-people for no particular reason then it feels a bit forced. Especially if the anthopomorphic animals act pretty much like regular humans.

This guy gets it.

It's a ven diagram situation. There's a lot of overlap between beast races and furry, but there is a distinction. There's a lot of minutia you can get into, but the best rule of thumb is posture. Furries are very often just humans with fur, tails, and an animal head. Beast races tend to have more slouched posture to account for the tail and digigrade legs, sometimes even non-human-like hands. Compare Argonians and Khajit from Morrowind with their counterparts in Oblivion and Skyrim.

Take Gnolls for example. They are typically given more of a hunch than other humaniod races, and even when given upright posture their neck makes them look more hunched.

As to if you can make a beast race sexy without being furry, that's probably impossible. Anything remotely furry furries will make porn of. It's just what they do. Hell it's what anyone does on the internet. Rule 34 and all that. Granted there are some beast races that it's harder to make sexy without going off model. I know plenty of furs who'd jump a gnoll as is, however Skaven are usually too gross without going off model.

So I guess that's the moral in the end. If you want to run a beast race without people thinking you're a furry make them disgusting. Though even that's a gamble, since some people might just assume you have a filth fetish.

>Furries are very often just humans with fur, tails, and an animal head. Beast races tend to have more slouched posture to account for the tail and digigrade legs, sometimes even non-human-like hands. Compare Argonians and Khajit from Morrowind with their counterparts in Oblivion and Skyrim.

That's a good point, although in all honesty the digitigrade thing was probably dropped because it was cheaper to give them the same equipment and animations as the other races.

I'd argue that what makes the Argonians and Khajiit more "furry" in Skyrim and Oblivion is the fact that there are very few non-cosmetic differences between them and the other races. In Morrowind the cat and lizard-people are clearly the pariahs of society and are often slaves, drug users or thieves. It's cliche but at least it's something. That aspect is still present but is much more muted in the other two games where Khajiit and Argonians are to a large extent just normal citizens with animal heads.

Why wouldn't an intelligent bipedal tool using sapient with a high social grouping act very much like a human in their day to day activities? No seriously, why must animal people be idiotic stereotypes of the animals they are based on and not the evolved bipeds they are now?

Like cat people and "murder presents". Does any of the people who advocate for such a thing understand that "murder presents" are cats trying to feed retarded kittens in their eyes, which is basically a social action of feeding the weak and less capable for the betterment of the group.

>you are too weak to feed yourself
>I'm like ten times bigger than you
>TOO WEAK

Cats are wierd man

Pretty sure it's just for comedy and poking fun and the dumb Furry character design.

Not saying they have to act like comic relief retards or be the stereotypical wolf packs or sewer rats but if they act and think like humans, then what's the point?

Whats hilarious is thats made by a furry poking fun at the idea of sparkledogs.

All the ways in which they aren't human. And for aesthetic reasons. It's the minor physical details that matter, not the mind, although that can be different becasue of certain physical details. Have you ever given thought to what having a tail would be like? To a Lupin, that's just their nature. So is speaking in a faux french accent while dining on cheese and wine their family has made, before they go off to challenge their rival to a sword duel over the honor of their sister.

If the animal aspect has no effect at all on their cultural development/social interaction etc. and they are just human with a different shape that is pretty lazy.

The exception being for some kind of visual metaphor. That is more a single character or whole setting thing though like with Black Sad where the animal reflects outwardly the type of person the character is.

We think like monkeys. Our religions and societies are all long extrapolations from monkey pack behavior. A society of, I don't know, elephants, would think about most things along very different lines, because they did not evolve a morbid fear of all non-elephants or a drive to kill non-packmates over food. A society of lions would be all about posturing and perceived rank and ritualized murder of your predecessor's children when you get a promotion, but there would be an immense taboo against actual violence because a predator too injured to hunt is a dead predator.

>A society of lions would be all about posturing and perceived rank and ritualized murder of your predecessor's children when you get a promotion, but there would be an immense taboo against actual violence because a predator too injured to hunt is a dead predator.
Except it wouldn't. You're taking a lion as it is now and simply slapping that behavior onto a much more social biped, without considering the ways in which that would change due to increased social activity and change to bipedal form. The killing of a rival's young is common to many limited social animals as a way to make sure only your genes survive. Increasing social activity removes such behavior, changing the strategies males use to keep their genes going. What likely wouldnt change is a focus on a male's mane, the biggest indicator of virility and tool of sexual selection among female lions. So as the lion becomes more bipedal, they lose their murderous streak towards rivals but keep the glorious locks.

We think like mammals, and some of our shared phobias are monkey specific, but other than that we share much in common with highly social predators and omnivores.

Beastmen are pretty hot

Physically they have to look like an animal, animals can be cute, please do not just do a human who likes the forest, get something like "The Island of Dr. Moreau", why use beast folk if you are just a hairy human that likes of nature? already has a lot of shows about hairy people who live in the forest, usually on the Discovery channel

only to have an idea
youtube.com/watch?v=-1RGks7qUsk

Only if you're gay and into half-bestiality

This is Kemonono, it's not even furry.

>Kemonono

Bruh they ripped as fuck

It's Kemonomimi or Kemomimi, not "Kemonono".

This is Kemono.

Is this "beastfolk" or "furry"?

They look like what most people think of when they think of demons tho

Yes
The charr are cool but they are not sexy
Them uggo mofos

Maybe something like Baphomet, not so much demons in general.

Yeah I guess you are right desu

...

The difference is whether the person playing or implementing the race is an obnoxious faggot who enjoys fucking his dog and would be better off dead or a reasonable human being who is fun to be around and adds value to the group.

That's a dragon knight, show some respect.

But assuming that the werewolves are of the actual transforming kind, why would their genitals just disappear though?

Their penises are evenly distributed throughout their entire body. This is why they are too hard to kill with bullets and deal aggravated damage with their claws.

Speaking as someone who used to hate Charr, there's a lot of great lewds on

>Can a beastfolk race be sexy and not be furry?
Yeah, take lamias for example.

One autists get triggered by the other no autists are around to get triggered by.

Really no difference. Furry is a fetish, beastrace could be used by a furry or it could not.

>The races I like are not furry look look, they're more like my favorite animals the hyena yiff yiff.

Yeah but that's furry-lite.

And not beast folk. It's a snake mermaid.

Well, what about centaurs?

Horse mermaid.

I'm always surprised to find someone who understands that -taurs are furry. Monstergirlfags are truly a cancer that attracts other cancerous groups.

Even funnier their defence is just like furries, that they don't look that offensive or even like furries. Forgetting the reason people hate furries is cause they push their shitty fetish into everything and being general shitters. Coming with defenses like "Oh its just a cute girl/animal person" or "There's nothing sexual about it, you can barely see their crotch trough the loincloth."

Furry-lite.

>Monstergirlfags
They will literally fight and claw to the death and insist that it's not furry as long as the face, and only the face is human.

Even if it's furry lite they tend to be better than furries.

They don't, for instance reck hotels in Washington. Or make their OCs drop apples on Isaac newton. And I have never seen a sparkle-monstergirl.

5/10 it was ok

The only reason monstergirlfags don't hold conventions is because they just live inside other fandoms and go to normal comic conventions. Also, by "sparkle-monstergirl" do you mean a monstergirl fursona, or a monstergirl that looks absolutely ridiculous? Because a cursory glance at Deviantart will give you both of those.

>They don't, for instance reck hotels in Washington.
Caus nobody cares what a wimpy anime fans do, as shitty monstergirls have cancered their in there.
Or make their OCs drop apples on Isaac newton.
No just other cringy shit like pretending to be nazis or remaking something famous into a monster girl.
And I have never seen a sparkle-monstergirl.
Literally every 16 year olds cat girl or whatever magical girl.

I assume that there had to be some. Though I did say that I personally hadn't seen any. It's probably furry holdover. But personally I see a lot more good things then bad come from the monstergirls, as opposed to the furries.

You say that but, aren't those qualities of every fetish or fandom.

I've just seen more good than bad.

Literally what is this "good" that you see about them?

Cause as far as I see, they're just as autistic and forces their shit into everything like full fledged furries.

You say that because you haven't found awful examples of monstergirl content, and people haven't shown you. Reading the monstergirl """"worldbuilding""""" threads on /monster/ a few years back has pretty well convinced me that monstergirlfags are effectively a combination between the sexual side of the furfag fandom and an enormous collection of bitter waifufags.

They have a mediocre anime series and multiple mangas(ranging from good to bad), as well as like 3 ok universes, and some video games.

There's a /monster/ board?

Why would you ever go to a Veeky Forums equivalent for your stuff. Veeky Forums is the best board I've ever seen and it's still an outhouse.

Wow its almost as if you're a furry-lite that doesn't care about their shitty fetish being pushed into medias.

You're totally right, furries wouldn't be okay with games, animes or mangas with furries in them. Thats why they are the bad.

>Can a beastfolk race be sexy and not be furry?
no

There's a /monster/ on the eighth channel, mate.

The interesting thing about the monstergirl fandom is that it's exactly as modular as the furry fandom. Every awful fetish fits into the monster fandom as easily as it does the furry fandom, possibly even easier.

For example, this.

You do realize that most of those are basically their own things right?
And most are ok.

They aren't nearly as corruptive as furries and generally produce better content.

That's literally not the point, there could be a good furry game or manga and I would still think furries are shit.

All fandoms are crap

>What is the difference between a furry race and a beastfolk race?
Whether or not they are sexualized. For example, someone with average sexual tastes would not find the beastmen from Warhammer Fantasy to be too sexy, therefore they can be considered beastfolk.

>Makes it painfully obvious he jacks it to animal people.
Ftfy

Burn your HDD.
>2wyyrd4me

No one with average sexual tastes would find most furry porn sexy, either, but it's still obviously porn.

You can't dodge sexualization, humans sexualize everything. What you should be doing is playing your game with adults, or learning to kick disruptive players.

It is both totally irrelevant and also pointless.

There is nothing wrong with furry characters or 'sexualizing' them. No difference between your sexy furry waifu or an elf slut either, it's all fictional fapbait either way.

Beastfolk are well-written established, have an admixture of animal and humanoid psychology, have anatomically correct genitalia, maturation, life expectancies, unique hormones to their own species/organisms in bological structure present in their namesake animal species, and have culture that isn't relative to any given pre-existing human culture.

Additionally, they keep to their own where relationships are concerned.

For example, a proper Beastfok Shark Race are nomadic hunters/scavengers in some cases who are always traveling, wearing nose patches on their noses, (Think medical masks but over their large noses) are mistaken for being aggressive, (Beyond Bullsharks tighers and hammerheads, which would be rated in terms of hostility to others) and their women literally fucking Bethlehem Pilgramage to their place of birth when pregnant as on par with how sharks navigate to their birthplace to give birth via that massive compass thing going on in their heads.

A shit beastfolk Shark-Race is when they become "Orcs of the sea." Fuck anyone that does this.

Also FUCKING EYES. Like many furries have this vision issue they don't seem to get, and depending on the eyes it determines the weight of intelligence or cartoony/realist the anthro is.

>t. furfaggot
I know this is hard for the likes of you to understand, but literally no one else appreciates you pushing your desire to fuck animals into everything.

"Literally sharks but humanoid" is just as bad.

Freya is kinda in the middle but I'd still consider her to be beastfolk

>Beastfolk are well-written established, have an admixture of animal and humanoid psychology, have anatomically correct genitalia, maturation, life expectancies, unique hormones to their own species/organisms in bological structure present in their namesake animal species, and have culture that isn't relative to any given pre-existing human culture.
Sergals?

She's awesome

She is, but I feel she drops off in power unless you stick to Dragon's Crest.

If their genitalia is described in any way, it's furry.

>full beast face and human hands
This is how its done.
Take an animal, make it bipedal and give it opposable thumbs, remember what makes the base beast interesting when detailing, and don't make it sexy.
If someone finds a dog or a lizard on two legs to be sexy, that is their deal.

>furries have bad taste
Woah!
Beat me