Even if it isn't a mistake... it looks like a mistake. The last thing I want is for some breeds to be "favored" by the staff when making genes. Tundras are already unpopular enough. If the staff starts saying stuff like "Tundras can't have cool patterns on this section of their fur, but that rule doesn't apply to any other breeds" they'll be even less popular.
Even if it isn't a mistake... it looks like a mistake. The last thing I want is for some breeds to be "favored" by the staff when making genes. Tundras are already unpopular enough. If the staff starts saying stuff like "Tundras can't have cool patterns on this section of their fur, but that rule doesn't apply to any other breeds" they'll be even less popular.
It takes
Twelve Years for one Imperial pair to produce a Primal-eyed offspring of a specific sex. Goal-based breeding is dead.
They could have at least added some sort of gradient so that the fur wouldn't look so flat next to the patterning.
They could have at least added some sort of gradient so that the fur wouldn't look so flat next to the patterning.
I have no problem with genes that live large swaths of un-textured skin or fur. I personally find some genes like tapir unappealing because of how busy they are, particularly around the face.
That being said, I'm baffled by the inconsistency - if every breed had un-textured chests and legs, I'd be fine with it, but why just tundras?
I have no problem with genes that live large swaths of un-textured skin or fur. I personally find some genes like tapir unappealing because of how busy they are, particularly around the face.
That being said, I'm baffled by the inconsistency - if every breed had un-textured chests and legs, I'd be fine with it, but why just tundras?
[quote name="@SilverLately" date="2018-10-23 05:19:08" ]
I have no problem with genes that live large swaths of un-textured skin or fur. I personally find some genes like tapir unappealing because of how busy they are, particularly around the face.
That being said, I'm baffled by the inconsistency - if every breed had un-textured chests and legs, I'd be fine with it, but why just tundras?
[/quote]
I honestly think that the entire reason rests on one feature of tundras that no other dragon has: They are mostly furred. All other dragons, even Coatls, are mostly leather/scales/feathers/skin, with no or little furred areas.
Tundras on the other hand are the only breed we have that has a HUGE portion of their bodies furred, and since, if you look at the other breeds with fur, they left the furred parts empty, tundras had their heavily furred parts left empty. HOwever, unlike the other breeds, instead of being just in a little area, it is a huge area that looks odd compared to the others.
I think this gene boils down to 'fur = no pattern' and on most breeds it is hardly noticeable, but on tundras, due to their being our only 'furred' breed, it looks vastly different.
I wouldn't mind if the others had had their fronts left patternless, but, since none of them have that natural delineation that tundras do with their furred parts, it would look even odder than the tundras do.
I have no problem with genes that live large swaths of un-textured skin or fur. I personally find some genes like tapir unappealing because of how busy they are, particularly around the face.
That being said, I'm baffled by the inconsistency - if every breed had un-textured chests and legs, I'd be fine with it, but why just tundras?
I honestly think that the entire reason rests on one feature of tundras that no other dragon has: They are mostly furred. All other dragons, even Coatls, are mostly leather/scales/feathers/skin, with no or little furred areas.
Tundras on the other hand are the only breed we have that has a HUGE portion of their bodies furred, and since, if you look at the other breeds with fur, they left the furred parts empty, tundras had their heavily furred parts left empty. HOwever, unlike the other breeds, instead of being just in a little area, it is a huge area that looks odd compared to the others.
I think this gene boils down to 'fur = no pattern' and on most breeds it is hardly noticeable, but on tundras, due to their being our only 'furred' breed, it looks vastly different.
I wouldn't mind if the others had had their fronts left patternless, but, since none of them have that natural delineation that tundras do with their furred parts, it would look even odder than the tundras do.
