Centaur Body Fixers

[Axelmania]

Watching a recent episode of 'The Magicians' got me interested in this. A person was injured and a centaur physician does surgery to stitch them up, and they nearly fall and hurt themselves upon awaking (a nurse offers a warning) before the operating table is so high up.

Which makes sense because the human arms of a centaur would probably be much higher up than a normal human's so they would need a higher operating table.

This could cause problems if they are being assisted by shorter species. I figure the etiquette is to raise the table for the tallest guy, and everyone else uses appropriate booster steps to reach it comfortable.

Still this probably causes awkwardness in mixed-size operations if someone needs to quickly move from one side of the table to the other, since you'd have to step down, move your stool to a new spot, and climb up it again, which could cost lives when time is short to clamp off a blood vessel or something.

I was thinking, with the 'Cyber-Centaurs' that a very useful cybernetic modification would be those extendo-hands (I think in NGR) because then a Centaur could use them to operate on a patient when no elevated table is available. Especially with on-the-ground elevations. I don't know if a centaur could stoop as comfortably as a human to get their human torso into a prone angle, seems like they would have flexibility issues there.

It might not be a complete solution since they're still farther away from eye-line. A telescopic cybernetic eye would probably also be helpful in that respect.

The TV episode also got me wondering about the dressing habits of centaurs. Do they share human modesties for their human halves? What about for their horse halves? Do they wear loincloths?

[Blue_Lion]

Well the human waist horse neck joint can bend forward think about how a normal horse eats it lowers its head to the ground. So I do not see things on the ground being out of a centaurs reach. I would think doing so would offer a centaur no greater discomfort than a human bending at the waist.

[taalismn]

I'm now seeing a cyber-centaur with 'low rider' hydraulics in his legs(and underbody lighting)....

[Axelmania]

Well the human waist horse neck joint can bend forward think about how a normal horse eats it lowers its head to the ground.

Do you know any art examples of this? Most depictions I've seen looks like there is no horse neck and that the human pelvis seems to merge into the horse foreleg pelvis or something.

[CyCo]

I'm now seeing a cyber-centaur with 'low rider' hydraulics in his legs(and underbody lighting)....

But how do you fit the spinning hubcaps??

8p

[taalismn]

I'm now seeing a cyber-centaur with 'low rider' hydraulics in his legs(and underbody lighting)....

But how do you fit the spinning hubcaps??

8p

At the hips/shoulders.

But seriously, adjustable legs might be worth contemplating, as long as the cybercentaur remembers to fully extend before taking off at top speed...trying to go flank speed when your legs are still in 'Shetland Mode' could be rather humiliating...

[Nekira Sudacne]

I don't really bother with most of the details of surgical rolls, mostly because I don't know much surgury. when operating with something like a centaur, there'd probablly some kind of alien physiology penalty that covers your character maybe not knowing about stuff like that.

[Blue_Lion]

Well the human waist horse neck joint can bend forward think about how a normal horse eats it lowers its head to the ground.

Do you know any art examples of this? Most depictions I've seen looks like there is no horse neck and that the human pelvis seems to merge into the horse foreleg pelvis or something.

Most of the pics of classical centaurs(some newer artist slim down the waist line more like a human one, but still it does not look like there is a pelvis in that spot to me) it looks more like the waist is a cross between a horse neck and human waist. There does not appear to be a pelvis where the horse neck is normally, the pelvis would if present would be in the part that is all horse. Even in D-bees of north America every thing below the abbs looks like it is all horse. PG 44 you see the centaur is leaning forward to the point that a line drawn from the horse shoulders would go through the head with no sign of a abominable crunch. So if you wanted to use art there is nothing I see showing any signs of discomfort or issues with them bending at the waist to reach the ground. On a evolution body mechanics level having a hard time picking something up off the ground would be a major design flaw.

[Axelmania]

The centaur would not necessarily be a product of evolution though.

WB30p44 there doesn't appear to be a horse neck. Where I would expect the cervical vertebrae of a horse is instead the lumbar vertebrae of the human.

That said, this illustration (it looks like signed 'LOVE' so I think by Comfort Deborah Love) does differ from other more iconic centaurs I remember though. Here it seems like the torso is projecting more out of the front of the torso than sitting atop it. Like for example http://razielhex.tripod.com//sitebuilde ... entaur.jpg from the Conversion Book.

Not only does he appear higher off the ground than a human of those proportions, but any bending he does would have to come from his human spine.

That really limits things. When humans bend over a lot of mobility comes from the hip joint but there is no human hip joint here. The option is for the horse to squat down a bit which humans can also do, but t here isn't that option to do anterior pelvic tilting because there's basically no pelvis.

http://i940.photobucket.com/albums/ad24 ... sitaur.jpg from SA2 is the same, toros appears to be coming more out the top than the front.

If we look at a horse whose neck is as upright as a centaur's spine, it's pretty awkward and they don't get the same kind of height. http://www.sustainabledressage.net/roll ... _force.png

While it's true horse can bend forward decently http://www.dingosbreakfastclub.net/Ding ... nimate.gif you can see as their cervical spine straightens out, it projects them out forward in a way I've never seen a centaur illustrated. The force needed to hold them at such an angle would be immense, and the usefulness questionable.

The most flexible I've seen them in Rifts is probably Canada : http://www.geocities.ws/obrasin/whoa.jpg because he is rearing up yet not tipping backward, you can see some of the possible forward-bending ability. I just think much of that is coming from the flexion of his human spine, contraction of the abdominal muscles.

It's a tough issue since much of these examples deal with CYBER horsemen whose contruction may differ from their natural form. I'd love to see Palladium's take on a centaur skeleton, how the horse bones change into human ones, and how they are aligned at different posture extremes.

The best guideline I can think to a skeleton is probably the centaur skelebot from CWC http://i46.servimg.com/u/f46/11/16/43/29/cs_cen10.jpg which basically looks like no neck and just the human lubar spine projecting out from the top of the scapular spines of the shoulderblades.

The pair at https://i.warosu.org/data/tg/img/0344/5 ... 557929.png are also pretty upright. If centaur can bend forward a lot, how come we haven't seen anything more extreme than Canada's rearing fighter. These two seem about as fixed in place as the nightbane cyclists: http://i.imgur.com/5utkrBO.gif

http://theminiaturespage.com/boards/msg.mv?id=234509 has a pretty interesting collection of pics with different skeletal takes. Much of it relies on whether artists perceive the human pelvis still existing and able to rotate on top of femurs or not.

[Blue_Lion]

Sigh you putting allot of thought in making it hard for them to do something they would need to have the ability to do.
If you think they are not a product of evolution fine but what ever created them would no they need to have the ability to reach things on the ground. An intelligent design would be less inclined to include a flaw that prevents them from reaching things on the ground.

There would need to be some sort of transition between human and horse parts, while they may look like they have a human waste internally they will be very different than a human. You are basing it of the idea that they human part is the same on the inside and that is flawed, the human lungs could not process the air needed and the human digestive track is would not support such a large animal.

My assumption is that there is that they have a joint at the base of the human waist start of the horse body to allow the bending. This would give them the ability they would need to reach the ground because even stooping the human arms are not long enough to reach the ground. While much of our ability to bend down may happen below the pelvis we can do a crunch movement above the pelvis to bend forward.

The skellebot is a poor choice of determine the skeletal structure of the centaur as there is no evidence the designers used the skeletal structure of a real centaur. But an attempt to create a combat robot that does not have the same considerations as a living creature.

Odd that you claim art makes it seam they can not but then dismiss PB official art for them in rifts because it disproves your stance.
There are classical drawings of centaurs turning greater than 90 degrees at the waist. Others show them as sum what barrel bellied even some more like they have a horse neck ability learn forward.
https://www.pinterest.com/pin/91197961178271818/
http://www.hellenicaworld.com/Greece/My ... A2640.html
-edited out link-do to possibly being seen as sexual.

As the classical art often shows them with the ability to pivot at the waste beyond what a human can we can rule out the idea that it is a joint like we have at our waist. Possibly more like a ball joint. So going off the classical art from around 450 bc they did appear to have great mobility at the waist. So I will say while they do not have a pelvis art does suggest they have great mobility at the waist. (as that is the source of of centaurs lore I will go with it. Centaurs where master archers suppose to be able to fire arrows on the move in the direction they are charging.)

So from what I have seen the art does seam to show they have great flexibility at the waist not a lack of the ability to bend. Now then where is this art that you claim shows they do not have the ability to bend at the human waste/horse neck?

[Axelmania]

How was I dismissing the art? I don't think it disproved my stance. The most flexible-looking pose I can recall seeing a Palladium Centaur in was the one rearing up in battle in Rifts Canada, and even then it was only enough to make his human torso perpendicular with his horse one.

Doing that wouldn't be enough to reach the ground because horse legs are longer than human arms, so it doesn't disprove the theory they can't reach the ground without having their front horse legs kneel.

Horses are able to kneel so I don't see the problem with this. Centaurs would have better defenses than a kneeling horse.

I'm not sure what pinterest thing you were referring do, I couldn't make out greater than 90 degree bend there. The HellenicaWorld image only has the human arms below the hooves because the human arms are straight while the horse legs are bent, it doesn't convey the mobility to reach ground level when the horse legs are straight.

[Blue_Lion]

How was I dismissing the art? I don't think it disproved my stance. The most flexible-looking pose I can recall seeing a Palladium Centaur in was the one rearing up in battle in Rifts Canada, and even then it was only enough to make his human torso perpendicular with his horse one.

Doing that wouldn't be enough to reach the ground because horse legs are longer than human arms, so it doesn't disprove the theory they can't reach the ground without having their front horse legs kneel.

Horses are able to kneel so I don't see the problem with this. Centaurs would have better defenses than a kneeling horse.

I'm not sure what pinterest thing you were referring do, I couldn't make out greater than 90 degree bend there. The HellenicaWorld image only has the human arms below the hooves because the human arms are straight while the horse legs are bent, it doesn't convey the mobility to reach ground level when the horse legs are straight.

As I pointed out that the flexing has not reached the point of a crunch. Thus it shows greater flexibility crunch can add mmuch greater forward bend. The Hellenica world also did not have much of a bend in the waist.
The printest shows centuar body to the side with a turn at the waist. That in one he was interacting with some one on the other side of him.

The point was I am disputing the claim that the centuar art implies limited mobility at the human "waist". But the truth is the centaur art show greater mobility there than humans with no signs of distress caused by extreme movement or crunch like abb movement.

[Axelmania]

Just to affirm, are we both talking about Canada 104 by Ramon Perez Jr. where a guy is reading Cyber Horse Weakness For Dummies?

While it is the most mobile I have seen the human torso of a centaur in palladium, it isn't particularly impressive. Anyone doing a high front kick usually flexes their spine slightly like this.

Think as if the horse thighs were human thighs. There isn't even a 90 degree flexion between them and human torso.

[Blue_Lion]

Just to affirm, are we both talking about Canada 104 by Ramon Perez Jr. where a guy is reading Cyber Horse Weakness For Dummies?

While it is the most mobile I have seen the human torso of a centaur in palladium, it isn't particularly impressive. Anyone doing a high front kick usually flexes their spine slightly like this.

Think as if the horse thighs were human thighs. There isn't even a 90 degree flexion between them and human torso.

Nope I stated what the book was it is in D-bees of north America (PG 44) I even gave the page the centaur is on.
Basically you can draw a line from the horses shoulders to the human shoulders and head with no sign of stress on the human midsection.

NO idea how you totally missed the direct quote of the source of the picture and default to a different book. Specally given the fact you quote the page number back. You countered with a picture of a cyberhorse man.

[Axelmania]

I guess I out it out of mind after the initial March 1 reply after two weeks.

That female centaur looks lovely rearing up but I'm not sure if Comfort Love took into account the need for a centaur to have a vertical human torso when the horse torso is horizontal.

That could be possible if the horse neck had been retained and a human spine taking the place of just the horse skull but visibly I see no added mobility, just a human torso jutting out horizontally, attaching to the shoulders where it would normally attach to a pelvis.

If CD Love were to sketch a normal/reared sequence with intermediate poses showing the change I would be interested in seeing it.

[Blue_Lion]

Basically you think there should be a limit so you just saying ignore the art. Got it.

You are forgetting the fact that the centaur human parts can not be the same on the inside as humans. And just assuming that it has to work like human because it looks like a human, even when art shows greater mobility.

[Axelmania]

The art doesn't actually show her arms being able to reach the ground.

Why can't some centaur parts be the same as human? The only place we have to deviate is near the unification line.

The art doesn't show greater mobility of the human spine. What we see here is an instance of a centaur whose human portion originates on a different aspect of the horse than we have seen in preceding Palladium artwork.

This might mean that this is a variation in the species, no need to assume the previous centaurs can adopt this posture or that this centaur can adopt the previous postures.

[Blue_Lion]

The art doesn't actually show her arms being able to reach the ground.

Why can't some centaur parts be the same as human? The only place we have to deviate is near the unification line.

The art doesn't show greater mobility of the human spine. What we see here is an instance of a centaur whose human portion originates on a different aspect of the horse than we have seen in preceding Palladium artwork.

This might mean that this is a variation in the species, no need to assume the previous centaurs can adopt this posture or that this centaur can adopt the previous postures.

I never did I was pointing out the art shows greater than human mobility.

There is no reason to assume there mobility is as limited as ours blocking them from doing what they need such as reach the ground. The art does not support a lack of mobility.

[Axelmania]

I'm not sure why you think reaching the ground is necessary for them. Nor what you think seems hypermobile about the wb30 pic.

This art simply shows the human spine originating more.anterior+inferior compared to previous illustrations which depict a more posterior+superior origin if the human spine.

Basically you have all.the other centaur pics showing the human spine arising from behind the horse scapulae and this one picture showing it rising from in front of them.

[Blue_Lion]

I'm not sure why you think reaching the ground is necessary for them. Nor what you think seems hypermobile about the wb30 pic.

This art simply shows the human spine originating more.anterior+inferior compared to previous illustrations which depict a more posterior+superior origin if the human spine.

Basically you have all.the other centaur pics showing the human spine arising from behind the horse scapulae and this one picture showing it rising from in front of them.

You can not see why a tool using race would need to be able to reach something on the ground? Really I would think the logic of that would be fairly obvious what is it like to never have to get any thing off the ground in your life?

You are also making a fundamental flaw in logic to place the defense on me when it is actually on your claim that the art implies a lack of mobility that is in question.(I have seen no art showing them having trouble reaching the ground but lots of art that shows greater than human mobility throw all the medical terms you like but the art does not truly support the upper body having the same flexibitly limitations as a human.)
The art from the world book is only part of the evidence I presented to show centaures have greater than human mobilty at the waist. You are trying to remove all context to make it look like I am making wild claims.

Here is what we know-
1. Centaurs upper body can not be the same on the inside as humans as the lungs and digestive track lack the ability to support the horse lower body as it would need to.
2.The art often shows greater than human mobility where the waist should be dating back to ancient times.

Some how despite this you are making a claim that they are structurally the same as humans in the upper body with the same limitations, and have no need to retrieve things from the ground.

To me this seams more a case of you want them to be limited even if is logically flawed and art shows greater than human mobility at the waist, but want me to play defense and prove something when the claim that needs proved is the art suggest the same mobility as humans.(I have already provided evidence of greater than human mobility you have provided no evidence of a lack of mobility instead are trying to change what the claim is to attack me.)

I find the logic that they are structurally the same flawed and the art suggest that they have a different internal structure to support greater movement, and see the need to reach the ground a fundamental requirement of any tool using race.

[Axelmania]

Art of ancient times doesn't matter. What matters is mobility exhibited in Palladium art. Where we've yet to be shown them picking something off the ground.

That isn't necessary to be a tool user. You can pick things off elevated surfaces, like stumps, facing uphill, a barge while walking in water.

What dilemmas are you imagining? We don't know how their history differs from ours. I don't agree with this theory.

Furthermore: the horse body can kneel. Reaching the ground could be possible that way. What I disagree on is the idea they could reach the ground without dipping the front legs.

We aren't arguing capacity to reach the ground but rather the ease in which it can be done.

[Blue_Lion]

Art of ancient times doesn't matter. What matters is mobility exhibited in Palladium art. Where we've yet to be shown them picking something off the ground.

That isn't necessary to be a tool user. You can pick things off elevated surfaces, like stumps, facing uphill, a barge while walking in water.

What dilemmas are you imagining? We don't know how their history differs from ours. I don't agree with this theory.

Furthermore: the horse body can kneel. Reaching the ground could be possible that way. What I disagree on is the idea they could reach the ground without dipping the front legs.

We aren't arguing capacity to reach the ground but rather the ease in which it can be done.

I got it you are trying to create an impossible standard and limit sources.
PB art as I pointed out does show a greater mobility at the waist than you would expect from a human.

Do you have any PB art that shows they can not pick something up from the ground?

Do they ever say the human torso has less mobility than the neck of a horse? Not just you assuming they can not from the art but the art showing they can not. (the art does show greater flexibilty than humans but you are still trying to claim the art and logic implies they can not So probe it.)



Your logic of tool user only needing to access elvated surfaces and not of a tool user not needing easy access to the ground is absurd. Biologically and planed they would have a need to be able to access things on the ground.

Looking back it should be you disproving there access to the ground with something more than your opinion. Because it was you that made the claim that art shows a lack of mobility that quite frankly I do not see that in the art.

[Axelmania]

If you still mean WB30p44 then I am confused because that doesn't show any special waist mobility to me. Her back has a pretty normal curve to it.

Focusing only on Palladium images isn't an impossible standard and it is a reasonable way to limit sources. I wouldn't consider Lord of the Rings to be an acceptable source for Balrog capabilities in Palladium either.

I'm not sure how you expect a picture to depict an inability to do an act. Acts that are not possible are inherently not depictable. It is like you asking me to provide a picture showing a human is unable to lick their elbow.

As I clarified earlier, this is also arguing a straw man because my stance is simply that the centaur must kneel to pick things off the ground. Not that they can't reach the ground, but that they can't do so with straightened forelegs.

Basically a.centaur would bend as a.whole unit, not just move the human portion in isolation.

This would be less necessary for the rare variant of a front torso instead of a top torso. Top torso is the predominant depiction of Centaurs in Palladium.

Assuming the centaur human spine is as mobile as a horse neck, this would only help when the spine originates from the front of the horse torso like the 1 example from DB30p44

All other examples of centaurs in pallasium art have the spine originate from the top of the horse torso. When a horse.raises its head that high it is very arched while the centaurs show basically neutral spinal curve and not hyper-extension.

[Blue_Lion]

If you still mean WB30p44 then I am confused because that doesn't show any special waist mobility to me. Her back has a pretty normal curve to it.

Focusing only on Palladium images isn't an impossible standard and it is a reasonable way to limit sources. I wouldn't consider Lord of the Rings to be an acceptable source for Balrog capabilities in Palladium either.

I'm not sure how you expect a picture to depict an inability to do an act. Acts that are not possible are inherently not depictable. It is like you asking me to provide a picture showing a human is unable to lick their elbow.

As I clarified earlier, this is also arguing a straw man because my stance is simply that the centaur must kneel to pick things off the ground. Not that they can't reach the ground, but that they can't do so with straightened forelegs.

Basically a.centaur would bend as a.whole unit, not just move the human portion in isolation.

This would be less necessary for the rare variant of a front torso instead of a top torso. Top torso is the predominant depiction of Centaurs in Palladium.

Assuming the centaur human spine is as mobile as a horse neck, this would only help when the spine originates from the front of the horse torso like the 1 example from DB30p44

All other examples of centaurs in pallasium art have the spine originate from the top of the horse torso. When a horse.raises its head that high it is very arched while the centaurs show basically neutral spinal curve and not hyper-extension.

The claim was that art shows a lack of ability to bend forward was made by you. To this point you have yet to provide any art that shows a lack of mobility.

As you pointed out the picture from debees of north America has a normal human spinal curve when leaning further forward than the standard position of centaurs in other art.(your treatment of this fact has been basically dismissive) This implies a joint below the human spine is handling the movement giving them a greater mobility at the human like waist than a human has. It is clearly showing greater mobility than the standard for humans at that point.

Making a claim that common centaur art shows a limitation provide no art to suport this then limiting the art to demaning something highly specialized is not a reasonable limation of source but an attempt to create a impossible standard against the other side instead of providing your own evidence to support your claim. It is an attack against another support to hide your lack of support and place the other person on the defense. (Specially given that one of the art showing greater mobility is in the list you trying to limit it to.)

So again I ask do you have any art that clearly shows such a limitation exist because at this point the art is implying a greater mobility than you claim it does. (As of this point you have provided no evidence that supports your claim merely made attacks the idea put forth before your claim to put me on the defense where is your evidence of limited mobility. It is almost like nothing supports your claim but you attack to mask that. Please provide evidence of the lack of mobility being shown in art and not just the wild conjectures and attacks you have been using.)

[Axelmania]

The problem.is we don't know whether Comfort Love's centaur is exhibiting an additional unseen joint as you propose or a species variation with the spine originating more anterior/inferior on the horse.

[eliakon]

So the question I have following this is...
Is there any support, at all, for the premise that Centaurs have limited mobility?
I understand that it can be a thesis statement to be explored as a what if with out support. But there appears to be nothing beyond a "what if Centaurs had limited mobility, what would be the ripple down effects"
Which is a nice what if, but logically it is unsound as the support for the premise (that Centaurs have limited mobility) is simply a fiat that it is true.

[Blue_Lion]

So the question I have following this is...
Is there any support, at all, for the premise that Centaurs have limited mobility?
I understand that it can be a thesis statement to be explored as a what if with out support. But there appears to be nothing beyond a "what if Centaurs had limited mobility, what would be the ripple down effects"
Which is a nice what if, but logically it is unsound as the support for the premise (that Centaurs have limited mobility) is simply a fiat that it is true.

So far no support has been provided for his claim that art implies limited mobility he said that there would be no evidence because there is no reason for them to draw them not being able to do something.

I have provided multiple sources of art showing difference than typically human waist movement placement on centaurs(some dating back to the ancient Greeks). His counter is basically the artist may have made a mistake or was drawing some deformed deviation. He even tried to limit the pool of art while shifting the burden of prof entirely on the negative.

I have no idea how he thinks it logical to say art implies a limited movement then when something is provided showing greater movement to basically claim that the artist is wrong or drawing a deformed centaur. It seams more a case of not wanting to admit he is wrong than a logical debate.

[Axelmania]

All species have mobility limitations IRL and I would only expect not to see that in supernatural shape shifters, which centaurs aren't.

I don't like this being framed as me "limiting" a centaur, because I an taking the very neutral position of their joints having the same range of motion as the species they are based on.

The invention of some sliding joint under the human lumbar spine is a grab to give them unusually high mobility.

Ancient Greek art is irrelevant here, only Palladium depictions matter. Or can i cite Pete's Dragon as evidence that Palladium dragons groe purple hair?

Only one example, the Comfort Love drawing, has been provided showing a centaur with a more forward spine. No evidence in the pic of the sliding joint you hypothesize.

There is no indication that the CL centaur is able to have an upright posture like some of the previous centaurs. This seems a lot like pointing at a hunchback as evidence that all humans can easily deform their vertebrae.

My assessment is normal mobility, the burden of proof is yours if you want to assert they have hypermobility and new joints foreign to human and horse.

[Nekira Sudacne]

It's not really a matter of joint motion or not. If centuars don't get penalties to the medical doctor skill, then they don't have penalties to the medical doctor skill. it does not matter how they get around the problem. unspoken joints, unique tools specifically designed for them or whatever.

[taalismn]

It's not really a matter of joint motion or not. If centuars don't get penalties to the medical doctor skill, then they don't have penalties to the medical doctor skill. it does not matter how they get around the problem. unspoken joints, unique tools specifically designed for them or whatever.

Just be grateful that their solution to serious injury isn't 'shoot the patient and put them out of their misery'.

[Blue_Lion]

All species have mobility limitations IRL and I would only expect not to see that in supernatural shape shifters, which centaurs aren't.

I don't like this being framed as me "limiting" a centaur, because I an taking the very neutral position of their joints having the same range of motion as the species they are based on.

The invention of some sliding joint under the human lumbar spine is a grab to give them unusually high mobility.

Ancient Greek art is irrelevant here, only Palladium depictions matter. Or can i cite Pete's Dragon as evidence that Palladium dragons groe purple hair?

Only one example, the Comfort Love drawing, has been provided showing a centaur with a more forward spine. No evidence in the pic of the sliding joint you hypothesize.

There is no indication that the CL centaur is able to have an upright posture like some of the previous centaurs. This seems a lot like pointing at a hunchback as evidence that all humans can easily deform their vertebrae.

My assessment is normal mobility, the burden of proof is yours if you want to assert they have hypermobility and new joints foreign to human and horse.

I do not see how your position is neutral, you are claiming they can not do something that is not neutral but a stance. A neutral stance is one that does not make a judgement one way or another. Basically there is no way a claim that they lack the ability to do something can be seen as neutral in to weather or not they can do it. (nice try at playing a victim chard to deflect focus but it is not going to fly you made a claim provide evidence to support it and not just your guesses but some solid support.)

What you did was create a skeletal structure you think they should have in your head then argue they have to have what you think they do, and any art that contradicts it should be seen as a deformed freak for not supporting you and ignored. That is not very neutral that is not even some what neutral that is a very strong stance about what they can and can not do. So yes you created a they have to have limited mobility stance based off what you think they should be able to do.

There may very well be purple haired dragons in rifts. That is really just a straw man in an attempt to limit the number of pictures to just a hand full but even that handful there is an example of body position outside what would be normally possible. The claim you made was about pictures of centaurs not limited to PB art. If you are discussing how they are depicted then any art is fair game, outside art in this context can only be fully discounted when it is incompatible with how they are depicted in PB. So art showing them with wings or horns is outside what rifts has and can be discounted.

You are asserting a limited mobility to counter my claim that they could bend forward at a seam, the burden of prof is to prove your claim that they do not have the mobility you say they do not. You created a stance that you claim to know what joints a fantasy creature has and the mobility said joints impart, that is in no way neutral but a very definite side.(more so as several pictures of centaurs have shown more mobility at the seam than humans have at the waist.)

You keep trying to change what i said as being hypermobility(is that even a real word?). I do not see bending at the horse neck/human waist seam as hypermobility, but normal mobility that would be reasonably needed to function.

Basically you claimed it was about the pictures or art, when art is provided showing greater mobility you try to discount it by reduce the pool or claiming that the official art chosen by PB to represent centaurs may be a deformed centaur and discount it. There is no indication in the art that the centaur is deformed or can not go to an upright position, and the art was chosen to represent the standard centaur. So in context there is no reason to assume it is deformed. Basically what you are trying to do is say ignore anything that does not support my theory.

So we have evidence in art of greater than human mobility at centaurs "waist" in art.
The joint that handles the forward movement of a horse neck when it bends forward would be below the merger of the human and horse parts but you keep assuming the connection has to be the same as it is on a human ignoring the joints on the horse in this section.(A centaur is neither a human nor a horse it may have parts that look similar but that does not mean the joints that combine the two are like what you will find in either one. You are operating under the the assumption that it has to be like the human joints however I have seen many pics of them bending or twisting at the waist in ways that is beyond what a human waist can do. Basing it off of the pictures of centaurs it is clear they are not depicted with a lack of mobility in that location.)
http://www.sustainabledressage.net/roll ... al_lig.jpg

You have no evidence in art showing a lack of mobility.

Conclusion the art does not support your theory of lack mobility.

You do not get to make a claim and then provide no evidence to support it, while demand the other side provide evidence and make up excuses to not use provided evidence in a debate. You make a claim you must be able to prove your claim, the burden is to prove a claim, so you made a claim prove it. You claim the art you have seen supports a lack of movement, but truth is art shows greater movement than would be possible for a human waist. The art does not show the joints that is something you are making up in your head.

Logically it make no sense to disprove a unsupported unproven claim.

At this point I only see 2 possible reason you are keeping this up without providing any art that shows a lack of mobility.
A-You are just being to stubborn to admit there is no support to your claim.
B-you are just trolling.

[Axelmania]

BlueLion you are asserting a claim that all centaurs can shift between the front-originating ManSpine we see in WB30 and top-originating spine we see in all other Palladijm art, if I gather right?

I don't see evidence supporting that. It could be easily examined as variation within the species.

Being able to do this would not be necessary for Centaurs to reach the ground.

Ask pointed out, they could simply knee.

Here is another option if you are against bending the knees: https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/73 ... b89482.jpg

This might be harder.since centaurs are probably more top heavy than normal horses but still feasible.

In both cases the front shoulders of the horse.body would be lowered, and the human body along with it.

One single instance of a weird centaur in one word book isn't grounds to invent joints that do not exist in either the human body or the horse body.

If we were told that the horse neck was instact it would be another story, but we are told it is a human body atop horse shoulders, not atop horse neck.

If you look at the sexy female Ixion in Canada, there may be some continuity from the thoracic horsespine into the human lumbar spine (follow the curves) but no obvious horse neckir any description if horse neck mobility being adapted into the human spine.

Humans have lots of variety in skeletons, without it meaning one variation can become another, so a picture of one horse who wouldn't have to stoop as much to grab something off the ground wouldn't mean all centaurs have that perk.

Hypermobile is a word. Randy Orton has hyper mobile shoulders for example. Its the more accurate way of saying double jointed.

In this case your neck theory seems to be inserting imaginary joints even though no text supports that.

Canada 102 "upper body of a man and the lower portion of a horse" necks aren't lower.
Canada 103 "horses with a human torso rising out of the shoulders" not "out of the neck"
Canada 106 "horses with a human torso rising out of the animal shoulders"

Inserting horse neck or mobility foreign to the human spine is fancruft. Human contortionists using spinal flexion can just barely bring their pelvis. When people appear to go below it, they do so by rotating the pelvis on the femurs.

Is there any evidence that palladium horses have a human pelvis? That would he a key thing. If the pelvis could rotate atop the horse torso it would give the mobility you are looking for.

Textwise I don't see that support. Canada 106 "the head, hands, arms, and chest are all human".

So abdomen/lower.back is where we reach mystery territory.

One thing supporting a bipelvic centaur theory could be the rivets we see on Palladium artwork. Perez centaurs have these where you would expect the human hip joint to be. However this could also be where you might expect the horse shoulders to be.

In these cases they are bionics though so can't necessarily view bionics as the best indicator of a second pelvis.

Gustovich's on CB 112 didn't have these though. Maybe a PF book would be Bette to find non bionic illustrations.

[eliakon]

Point of clarification.
Centaurs have the appearance of a human torso on a horses shoulders.
They are not literally a human torso on a horses shoulders.
They are a race that is built... wait for it... like Centaurs. Not like humans, not like horses, but like Centaurs.
As I have never seen any Centaur skeletons in real life I am forced to conclude that they are, indeed, totally fictional and thus their internal anatomy is fictional and speculative.

[Axelmania]

103/106 is appearance which is still notable since we are.not told of there appearing to be any horse neck or human pelvis..either of which would provide additional axes of motion.

102 doesn't say appearance appearance though. It is a literal statement.

"They are strange beast men with the upper body of a man and the lower portion of a horse."

CB 113 had a similar literal statement.

"Beings who are half-man and half-horse".

So their lower portion is literally 100% horse. This isn't like some Nightbane Morphus where it just looks that way but might be amorphous shadow blobs inside, centaurs are literally those two things.

Obviously their second pair of horse lungs and second horse stomach will require some finnagling in the middle, as would how the small/long intestines connect from stomachs to a port of elimination.

It could be that by relying on larger horse organs that the human portion has more room for abdominal muscles to enhance mobility. While the human spine if a centaur doesn't visibly have more vertebras than a human, it could be possible that the vertebrae could enjoy create range of motion than a human if supported by longer muscles.

The difference between CB/Canada and D-Bees doesn't appear to shoe that though. The spine appears pretty straight, just starting from the front face instead of the top face or top/front corner.

This contradicts explaining it by spinal flexibility and instead leads to relying on horse neck mobility or human pelvic mobility even though neither part is indicated by the text or visible in the pictures.

CB114 mentions they "avoid replacing the human portions of their bodies" further affirming they have human parts.

I also noticed a "hip holster" mentioned but it doesn't specify if this refers to horse hip or human hip. Usually hip implies pelvis (you wouldn't normally see the front shoulders of a horse called hips) and a holster in the rear leg of the horse portion would seem awkward to reach.

If centaurs have a second human pelvis atop the front shoulders of the horse this would lead me to be more accepting of the idea that they could shift between vertical spine and horizantal spine.

Hips are usually easier to notice in artwork with bare midriffs instead of bionics. Particularly with women. The best art I know of to illustrate this is Canada 106. The problem with Perez is he so seamlessly flows the human midriff into the horse shoulders that its hard to tell. Particularly because of the rear angle.

If Perez could draw the Centauress cutie from the front it might be easier to tell. She would make a great NPC. She is clearly unusual since she looks to have a bionic left hand. Even males don't usually do that. It looks like bionic reinfircement along the top of her horse spine which might indicate Cyber Armor or even partial conversion.

One of the difficulties with second pelvis theory is how motion would be controlled. Human hip extension is done by the glutes and hamstrings attached to the femur and tibia/fibula. Since those human bones aren't present, where would they attach in a centaur? The front legs? Shoulders? Spine?

[Blue_Lion]

103/106 is appearance which is still notable since we are.not told of there appearing to be any horse neck or human pelvis..either of which would provide additional axes of motion.

102 doesn't say appearance appearance though. It is a literal statement.

"They are strange beast men with the upper body of a man and the lower portion of a horse."

CB 113 had a similar literal statement.

"Beings who are half-man and half-horse".

So their lower portion is literally 100% horse. This isn't like some Nightbane Morphus where it just looks that way but might be amorphous shadow blobs inside, centaurs are literally those two things.

Obviously their second pair of horse lungs and second horse stomach will require some finnagling in the middle, as would how the small/long intestines connect from stomachs to a port of elimination.

It could be that by relying on larger horse organs that the human portion has more room for abdominal muscles to enhance mobility. While the human spine if a centaur doesn't visibly have more vertebras than a human, it could be possible that the vertebrae could enjoy create range of motion than a human if supported by longer muscles.

The difference between CB/Canada and D-Bees doesn't appear to shoe that though. The spine appears pretty straight, just starting from the front face instead of the top face or top/front corner.

This contradicts explaining it by spinal flexibility and instead leads to relying on horse neck mobility or human pelvic mobility even though neither part is indicated by the text or visible in the pictures.

CB114 mentions they "avoid replacing the human portions of their bodies" further affirming they have human parts.

I also noticed a "hip holster" mentioned but it doesn't specify if this refers to horse hip or human hip. Usually hip implies pelvis (you wouldn't normally see the front shoulders of a horse called hips) and a holster in the rear leg of the horse portion would seem awkward to reach.

If centaurs have a second human pelvis atop the front shoulders of the horse this would lead me to be more accepting of the idea that they could shift between vertical spine and horizantal spine.

Hips are usually easier to notice in artwork with bare midriffs instead of bionics. Particularly with women. The best art I know of to illustrate this is Canada 106. The problem with Perez is he so seamlessly flows the human midriff into the horse shoulders that its hard to tell. Particularly because of the rear angle.

If Perez could draw the Centauress cutie from the front it might be easier to tell. She would make a great NPC. She is clearly unusual since she looks to have a bionic left hand. Even males don't usually do that. It looks like bionic reinfircement along the top of her horse spine which might indicate Cyber Armor or even partial conversion.

One of the difficulties with second pelvis theory is how motion would be controlled. Human hip extension is done by the glutes and hamstrings attached to the femur and tibia/fibula. Since those human bones aren't present, where would they attach in a centaur? The front legs? Shoulders? Spine?

congrats if the centaur was the same as a human on the inside it would die or not be able to move do to lack of needed lung capacity. Oh wait you admit it is not the same on the inside when you address the lungs. Pick either it is exactly the same in the two halves or there are changes needed to make it a working life form. You seam to be demanding a literal no difference in one area while admitting it can not be the same on the inside.

I disagree on the literal being 100% the same on the inside. That seams to be you reaching for what is not there. They may be half human and half horse but those halves lead to something new, not just cut and pasting parts. The way the describe it is more about how to picture it than a literal limitation.

I find your assertion that the art chosen to represent them by be represent a deviation or deformed member adsorb. It is more hey you found something that does not support my theory so I create a new theory to say ignore it. Simply put in context of the art and how it was used there is no reason to assume it is a deviation from the norm. Your claim that it is need to either have support saying it is or be dropped.(Basically if something says it is a deviation or deformed then you can make that claim and it should be ignored but as the art was chosen to represent the race we have to in context assume it is a representation of a normal centaur.)

Saying ignore anything that does not support my theory seams more about arguing to argue than trying to debate.(special given th3e context of the image in question.) You have not addressed the picture,(just made an excuse to ignore it) but your claim that it is a deformed member has been addressed, the context is art to represent a normal centaur in a book on dee-bees so that is what it is.

[taalismn]

Centaur: "You know, folks, if I drop something on the ground, I don't care if I have to bend down at the waist, or if I have to kneel on my forelegs to reach it, of if I have to carve a hooked stick to snatch it up, I AM GOING TO PICK THAT THING UP!!!! And the same goes for a patient I'm working on! Field surgery? Yeah, I'll get down to work! If I got bionic legs that can raise or lower? Okay, I'm good with that! And if I can wing it, a well-equipped hospital facility with treatment tables that can be positioned as needed! That's the advantage of being a tool user and belonging to a technologically advanced society! We adapt, we overcome, we get it done!"

[Axelmania]

I'm not even sure why were arguing about how they would do it. Even if centaur human torsos did project horizantally from the front of the horse (even though the text clearly says atop the shoulders not in front) the horse would probably still stoop using the horse legs since they would use their body in unison and not like a human stuck in a horse statue.

If they were this way then the vertical torsos could possibly be knew with bionicly relocated spines.

While half and half, the mix needed not be upon the strict line of separation we might guess at outside appearances. Human lungs merged with horse lungs could still be half and half.

[taalismn]

I'm not even sure why were arguing about how they would do it. Even if centaur human torsos did project horizantally from the front of the horse (even though the text clearly says atop the shoulders not in front) the horse would probably still stoop using the horse legs since they would use their body in unison and not like a human stuck in a horse statue.

If they were this way then the vertical torsos could possibly be knew with bionicly relocated spines.

While half and half, the mix needed not be upon the strict line of separation we might guess at outside appearances. Human lungs merged with horse lungs could still be half and half.

I'm going with deliberate design in the Centaurs, rather than a naturally evolved species. They were created sometime in the distant past, and their biology, as a result, contains a number of features that show the signs of mishmash of disparate parts, eugenic shoehorning, and some messy brute-force biowizardry-style shennanigans. Redundant organs, generalized digestive system, etc...stuff that would make a naturalist/biologist gouge their eyes out trying to figure out how it all came about naturally.

[Blue_Lion]

Well speaking mostly of requirements for life. Access to the ground would be needed for a race to live. Why well water typically has to be gathered at the ground level. As a tool user they would also need the ability to retrieve things that are dropped, as well as get resources off the ground.

Now then if they lacked mobility at the human waist/horse neck and the human torso was in the upright position even if they lowered the horse body to ground they would not be able reach the ground. If the human body was stuck in an upright position then rolling to the side would pose huge health risks. Child birth would also be a huge complication if they had trouble bending forward at the human waist/horse neck, I would think for child birth they would need all the spines in a some what straight line.

The joint that provides the mobility of a horse neck to go forward is below the human waist line. They do not need hypermobilty(if that is even a real word) at the human waist/horse neck, what they need is about the same range of motion that the joint found below the human waist provides a horse. It will not likely place their mouth to the ground(do to a further back resting position) but will put the ground withing easy reach of their hands when they lowered their upper body.(The pic found in D-bees representing centaurs is within that range of motion.)

If they require the ability to turn at the waist and access the horse back then hey would need an entirely different requirement of the joints in that location than found in either horse or human. That would be more like the level of mobility found in the neck of a bird such as an owl. Odd the looking it up the owl neck bones kind of have the same curve as a human spine.
https://img1.etsystatic.com/000/0/62203 ... 202401.jpg

[Axelmania]

They would have no trouble retrieving water using rope and bucket from a well. They could also fill waterskins to drink from rivers.

Tool users can work on benches instead if the ground to avoid bending. They are described as magnificent woodworkers so a simple workbench shouldn't be a problem.

They are also friendly with fairies who could have helped retrieve small tools. They didn't necessarily evolve in isolation from other races who could exist symbiotically and covr for weak points.

Why do you keep questioning the legitimacy of a word instead of looking it up?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypermobility_(joints)

I'm not saying stooping alone would be enough. Elbows at hips, I realize the thickness of the horse torso is create than the length if forearm+hand. The centaur would also round their human spine too, to loer the shoulder joint and arm with it, which may be enough.

However infexible a foetal centaur might be, a centaur mother may have an exit flexible enough to accommodate.them.

Human spine is probably flexibl enough for most to look behind and reachbackward with one eye and one arm.

[Blue_Lion]

They would have no trouble retrieving water using rope and bucket from a well. They could also fill waterskins to drink from rivers.

Tool users can work on benches instead if the ground to avoid bending. They are described as magnificent woodworkers so a simple workbench shouldn't be a problem.

They are also friendly with fairies who could have helped retrieve small tools. They didn't necessarily evolve in isolation from other races who could exist symbiotically and covr for weak points.

Why do you keep questioning the legitimacy of a word instead of looking it up?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypermobility_(joints)

I'm not saying stooping alone would be enough. Elbows at hips, I realize the thickness of the horse torso is create than the length if forearm+hand. The centaur would also round their human spine too, to loer the shoulder joint and arm with it, which may be enough.

However infexible a foetal centaur might be, a centaur mother may have an exit flexible enough to accommodate.them.

Human spine is probably flexibl enough for most to look behind and reachbackward with one eye and one arm.

A well is not how you retrieve water in nature. A well must be built. What you are saying is they can only survive is some one builds the infrastructure to for them to. Basically your post make them out to be a functionally limited race not because the book says they are but because you think they should to be. Why your post is making out to be a handy caped race that requires help to be able to survive. If they where functionally limited that would be worth saying for skills and what not. The fact that it is not listed as functionally limited and we have picture to represent them showing a position out side what your posts are presenting the mobility as being means that unless you have something stating or showing they lack the mobility your stance is completely unsupported. (While the lack of mention of a limitation in function means they logically do not have a lack of function.)

If I understand you seam to be saying that it is more reasonable for female to have some bizarre birth canal than a joint that allows them to bend forward. Your logic is starting to get really broken. So no changes in human mobility at the seam but lets give them some bizarre birth canal that does not require what it pushes out be in a mostly straight line.

Because it is not in the dictionary on my PC, just because some one created a Wikipedia for a word does not make it a real word. Basically you are asking why I did not look up a word not in my dictionary, and questioned its legitimacy. Because it is not in my dictionary, I question it.

[Axelmania]

By discussing wells you are already talking about a species using technology and infrastructure.

A centaur could wade into a river of a certain depth (they are heavier and have a wider base than humans, to resist being washed away) and drink that way if necessary.

Not living in a void if other sentient species does mean we don't have to worry about accessibility as they evolved. Even though we.shouldn't necessarily believe they did evolve. Fairies are friendly, tool users, and make food.

Dictionaries don't include all words. Here is a National Institute of Health article using the word.
https://rarediseases.info.nih.gov/disea ... ility-type In the future please make a basic attempt to look up a word online before implying other posters are inventing it.

My default of only giving them the mobility of corresponding man/horse parts is sticking to the next and not handicapping them. I mention they could live aided only as a note but I don't rely in that.

Mobility limitations are surpass able if you use imagination. They don't live on some endless flat plain nor is food/water necessarily only accessible at hoof level.

A centaur could be fine wading up to their knees, kneeling at that point and fleeing the human spine and cupping the hands would make water drinking doable.

Consider we don't know if they even existed pre medieval technology. They may have always had access to drinks lime drinking flasks.

[Blue_Lion]

Ummm. No if words are used not found in the dictionary and not part of common speech I will assume they are made up if you do not like that stick to common speech. There is no reason for me to waste my effort looking up 5 dollar words that are being thorn in as part of an attack to make some one sound smart when there post lack any real support.(The burden is on to prove what you say is correct if you say something and some thinks it is wrong then you must prove it true. A word not found in the dictionary is not an official word regardless of who uses it.)

So your whole solution basically amounts they are handy capped race and only survived because a race known for pranks and mischief took pity on them. They may not be from a world where they are the only race but a race that is not able to sustain itself would not last. There is no reason a fairy would be happy to pick up every thing you drop the constant demands would likely annoy them after a while then they go from friendly to annoying. Oh hey eat fairy food great idea, it is not like there is any thing wrong with that.

We can trace when they where created using mythology. They first appear in mythology during ancient times, as the way the history of rifts earth is written the reason things are in ancient myth is because they vested earth before the Atlantis incident.

Now then there is a condition in cold weather where you can freeze more so if you get wet by wading in to water every time you need a drink.
(Despire your claimed solutions they all have major draw backs to being able to survive in the wilds as centaurs on rifts earth have done.)

Note with the same range of motion a that a horse has at the neck they would do more than just go verticle to the ground and should place the ground in their reach. As the main joint that handles that motion is below the human waist there is no reason to assume it does not provide the same motion. In addition as I pointed out birthing a child with a spine at anything close to 90 degrees would be extremely complicated. As you push it out you risk causing spinal damage if the spine can go through a range of motion and pass out some what straight that makes the birthing easier. Not about flexibility of the exit but direction of force on the spine.

Logically it makes more sense for them as a functional race to have a greater range of motion than a human at the waist. A horse level mobility at the joint would be reasonable for a race, a lack of that mobilty makes them a race that is not able to function.

**So again I ask to you have anything that says they can not lean forward(art seams to imply they can) or are you just going to keep attacking other peoples logic and use lame justifications why they do not have the level of mobility they would need to not have listed skill penalties.

[Axelmania]

There is no "the dictionary" and plenty of words that are very real in scientific publications do not appear in dictionaries for the layperson.

You are again mischaracterizing my argument after I corrected you. They are not handicapped, all species have different capabilities. Are gorillas handicapped for not being able to sprint on hind legs as fast as humans?

Centaurs are described as human torso above horse shoulders, not above a horse neck. No mention of a horse neck is made.

One piece of artwork shows some.centaurs have the torso more in front instead of atop. This alone is insufficient evidence tonassume mobility between the two origin points.

I didn't say they can't lean forward so I again request you stop misleading readers by stating that. They have a human spine which flexes and provides forward bending that way. What they are not confirmsd as having is a either human hips or horse neck.

Do you have any evidence of feral centaurs who use no tools existing in places with freezing winters? Perhaps somewhere in Hinterlands is a tribe who explicitly doesn't use waterskins?

A ladel is pretty simple carpentry for bowmakers and would solve this very easily.

Centaurs may well have been created at ladel-making technological levels. Provide evidence they evolved if you want to make arguments about them needing to be able to get by without tool use.

[Blue_Lion]

A requirment to have assitance to do what should be reasonable for you to do on your own in order to survive is being handy capped. Needing asstance to accomplish common every day task is almost the very indention of disability.

They are described that way to help you visualize them. It is not a statement of a disability or imitation of movement.

So we have 1 picuture in Rifts art repestenting them placing the centaur outside what you claim the normal range of movement and all the ancient art that you want to left out showing greater movment at the waste.

We have 0 art demonstrating an inabilty to move forward and no statements that clearly say they can not.

That means currently the evidence is 1 art word for them having the ability to lean forward at the waist and 0 against it. Given there is no mention of penalties that would be incurred doing some tasks if they lacked the ability to do so the currant evidence supports them having greater movement.

So unless you have any support that says they lack the ability to lean forward currant evidence says they do.

I am tired of your lame excuses and narrow point of view understanding attacks on what I post either present evidence or you loose the debate.

[Daniel Stoker]

Aren't we also making an assumption that they evolved naturally which based on how strange their biology is seems unlikely anyway.


Daniel Stoker

[eliakon]

Aren't we also making an assumption that they evolved naturally which based on how strange their biology is seems unlikely anyway.


Daniel Stoker

Even if they are artificial if they were incapable of survival on their own that would be a rather large thing to note in their racial write up.
That sort of thing is worth, oh I dunno... a racial penalty on your survival skills or something?
And as has been pointed out, not being able to reach the ground is a rather significant limitation on a race and likely to result in a real handicap to their survival.

Not to mention, as Blue Lion keeps pointing out the entire premise is faulty because it presumes that something that is not shown is true and that what is shown is actually false.
That is known as 'head canon' but when your rewriting everything to fit your own imagination then your not in the same universe as the books anyway...

[Daniel Stoker]

But they don't need to bend like some have insisted to survive and if they started out as a tool using race then they'd be even better off.


Daniel Stoker

[Blue_Lion]

But they don't need to bend like some have insisted to survive and if they started out as a tool using race then they'd be even better off.


Daniel Stoker

Where did the tools and resources come from?
You still have to live long enough and have a way to build said tools.

Sure you may be able to carve out a stick to pick things up or get water but you need to get something to carve with.

Race with the ability to use tools still would need to build said tools or have a source of said tools. If your survival is fully dependent on something to assist with the basics to live then you are disabled. If an entire race was then the race would be disabled.

(It seams to me if a race had a inability to perform an action or disadvantage to perform a skill that would be listed as a racial penalty. So a race without stated penalties could not be a race that is disabled.)

[Daniel Stoker]

Beats me, I'd assume from their creators originally and then as they spread in the Palladium World they made their own based on what they learned had been taught. It's not like humans (and centaurs have the same level of intelligence) aren't really good at making basic tools to help them shape their world and survive. And they can still kneel and or lay down to drink water that's on the ground instead of bending over if they don't have a tool, so it's not like they'd be stuck having to stand their dying while staring at a pond.


Daniel Stoker