Uplifted otters

[Madarin Dude]

Well i have taken a few too many trips to the zoo with my daughter but while there I often thought of what critters would be most likely to be uplifted. Most non primates spend most of their tome sleeping and are not curious. The exception is otters who are curious and active. i got the thinking about how uplifted otters would look how would the form societies etc. of course there are waterslides on all their starships.

 

[ThunderChilde]

Ah, toss in Raccons while your thinking this through, and pernicious squirrels. Both are curious to the point of insanity.

Otters are good, social, semi-tool users already, and would make for a fine Solomani Uplift Subject.

Might regret uplifting squirrels, seems like a gamble on creating the best 2nd floor thieves in Known Space.

Raccons........ask the US Army about raccons. Many say they wrote the field manual. They work in tight small teams to pilfer a camp, while there are guard patrols. A steel footlocker will not keep them from pogie bait. I can go on.

 

[Ran Targas]

I like the idea but do they have to be uplifted?

What if they were moved along with proto-humans (and other life forms) to a newly terraformed world by the Ancients. The proto-humans didn't make it but the otters did. Given an evolutionary push and room to grow, they became more than what they started as.

Maybe they haven't advanced quite as far as humans would have, but they survived, grew smart, and dominated their world.

 

[aramis]

Cats, Dogs: both have curious streaks, and both are social.* Neither have tool use, but both adapt well to interspecies communication.

Cetaceans: Arguments over whether or not they are sentient are already present in the literature. Their lack of manipulators is, in fiction, often solved with waldos.

Primates: Some already are indisputably sentient (us); others are damned close if not already (most other apes, some monkeys), and many are VERY smart animals. All primates are highly curious.

Raccoons, otters: Argument made above. Increasing brainmass and better thumbs will make them MUCH more capable. They both make primate curiousity look rather mild.

Ferrets and other Weasels: in addition to being as curious as Racoons, they are also far harder to intimidate... Fearless, into everything, and viciously competent predators. The stories of wolverines and tormenting hunters are legion and many are credible.

Birds in general: Pick any large body bird. Social, vocal, and capable of tool use already, and many species already capable of conceptual language use.

*Cats sociability is dependent upon densities... but even the notably singular tigers and bobcats will, when constrained and well fed, develop prides just like lions, wildcats, and domestic cats.

 

[Madarin Dude]

I like the idea but do they have to be uplifted?

What if they were moved along with proto-humans (and other life forms) to a newly terraformed world by the Ancients. The proto-humans didn't make it but the otters did. Given an evolutionary push and room to grow, they became more than what they started as.

Maybe they haven't advanced quite as far as humans would have, but they survived, grew smart, and dominated their world.

I agree but for lack of a better word. I think maybe divergent parallel evolution? There is a race of otter people in Ringworld engineers they did not go into much detail on them though. I really thought of it at my 5th to 10th trip to the zoo this year.

I have a vision of starships with slides all over with otters sliding from floor to floor on their bellies maybe with little streams with fresh fish in them in the ship.

 

[Icosahedron]

I like the idea but do they have to be uplifted?

What if they were moved along with proto-humans (and other life forms) to a newly terraformed world by the Ancients. The proto-humans didn't make it but the otters did. Given an evolutionary push and room to grow, they became more than what they started as.

Maybe they haven't advanced quite as far as humans would have, but they survived, grew smart, and dominated their world.

I believe the Ancients timeline is only 300 000 years. That's a very short time for evolution. I'm not sure how 'different' they would be.

 

[aramis]

I believe the Ancients timeline is only 300 000 years. That's a very short time for evolution. I'm not sure how 'different' they would be.

300,000 years is far enough back that we're not talking Homo sapiens... nor even Homo neanderthalensis... but Homo erectus and early Homo heidelbergensis. (Albeit H.h. was considered H. sapiens heidelbergensis until recently)

We're talking sufficient drift time to result in at least 5 distinct human species on one world. (H. sapiens, H. neanderthalensis, H. heidelbergensis, H. erectus, and H. floresiensis)

We're also talking time for the development and extinction of 2 species of pigmy elephants, and the extinction of the subfamily of mastadons.

Also, the Polar Bear is apparently less than 100,000 years old as a species, with significant morphological changes up to about 40KYA...

300KY is more than sufficient for evolutionary needs, especially in a high-adaptation-pressure situation.

 

[Ran Targas]

I believe the Ancients timeline is only 300 000 years. That's a very short time for evolution. I'm not sure how 'different' they would be.

What Aramis said . J/k, but I did state that an evolutionary push might be a necessity. Otters have been otters for a long time without evolving on their own into a rival species. They seem perfectly content catching fish and sliding down river banks; global domination just isn't as appealing I guess.

Maybe whatever killed off the proto-humans also provided the necessary stimulus to encourage the development of bigger brains and thumbs (although I think their hands are already pretty ... ah ... handy). Although rather cliche-ish, used ad nauseum to explain OTU species, a good old fashion global natural disaster could be to blame.

As for their starships, I can imagine otters crawling through narrow tubes instead of 1.5m wide passageways and sleeping in spaces normally only visited by the ship's cat during its rounds. Could make for some very interesting designs or conversions.

 

[rancke]

300,000 years is far enough back that we're not talking Homo sapiens... nor even Homo neanderthalensis... but Homo erectus and early Homo heidelbergensis. (Albeit H.h. was considered H. sapiens heidelbergensis until recently)

That may or may not be true in our universe (It's just the latest popular theory, not an established fact), but it's provably wrong in the Traveller Universe. In the TU, Science has the added evidence of several dozen Hominid populations, all of them subspecies of Homo sapiens whose latest common ancestor lived on Earth 300,000 years ago. This latest common ancestor obviously must have been Homo sapiens also. And that holds even if you don't accept GT information as valid. If you do accept it, that ancestor even has a name, namely Homo sapiens antiquus.

We're talking sufficient drift time to result in at least 5 distinct human species on one world. (H. sapiens, H. neanderthalensis, H. heidelbergensis, H. erectus, and H. floresiensis)

The Neanderthal may have been H. sap. himself; there's disagreement about that among experts. But there's no doubt 300,000 years is enough for speciation to have created Hominid species that are no longer H. sap. And several of the Minor Human Races in the TU are such Hominid species.

300KY is more than sufficient for evolutionary needs, especially in a high-adaptation-pressure situation.

That's true enough.


Hans

 

[Icosahedron]

Ok, I stand corrected. Evolution ain't my forte.

 

[coldwar]

Evolution is the need for change, humans devoleped quickly to suit a particular habitat, otters are built for a specific habitat and though they are curious, they wont go to far from a habitat they are built for thus in a rapid need for change they will simply die out.

If you want to have a race that came through evolution you need to look at those species that can cope in two or more habitats, such as feline species, ALL SPECIES of birds (who frankly have never died out due to rapid change in habitats) Very small Mammals (Vermin) and a few reptilian species as long as they can cope in more than two habitats and have the need to grow bigger brains.

Though I did say all species of birds, it is highly unlikely one will evolve to such a state that they would have there own nations, they would would remain as there species social needs, thus an evolved eagle would stay alone for most of its life, where as a Evolved species of Parakeets would form small to large tribes. Even though all birds are extremely smart and there would be a great need for them to evolve that far and it would not be a simple one like a meteor hitting the planet. It would be something beyond what we know, or a new species of bird that is fairly large, most likely with a wing span of more than 10 feet and they would have to be in large numbers. and even then it would take timefor one species of bird to be able to challenge it.

That is the same bases as man evolved, large beasts (mammoths, and large predators) were overcome by man who became the new predator and thus they then evolved becomeing us.


With uplifting, the creature in question does not need to be nesercarily smart as Bears compared to apes a very dull in intelligence, and thus the Ursa is dull in intelligence to mankind. Aslong as you could easily get hold of many of the same specious that are able to reproduce fairly quickly for there lifespan to, then that specious would be a likely candidate for being uplifted. Its not just are they smart, as you going to be looking will the new race successed in the next 100 to 1000 years in maintaning its population

 

[Horatius]

If you're looking for ways to incorporate uplifted otters into your game, you might want to take a look at some older materials for suggestions.

The comic book Fusion that was published by Eclipse had an uplifted otter by the name of Tan who served as the ship's engineer. I believe he was from one of the Canadian colony worlds, having graduated from LeBlatt's University. (I'm sure theres a story there)

Also, you might want to look at the RPG Albedo, printed by Thoughts and Images, and based on the comic book Command Review or Albedo. (CR was a compilation of issues, Albedo was the original.) These were written by Steve Galacci and had some good insight into personality types of various uplifted species.

As a footnote, I"m thinking about introducing Albedo into a Traveller campaign. Both games use a 2-12 stat system and Albedo has a superior social system and a vastly superior skill system.

 

[Max]

Depends on what you are uplifting them for, if you want to uplift a species to make caretakers for subluminal cold-sleep colonization ships than curiosity is a defect, sloths or cows would be a better choice than otters. If you're uplifting to make pseudo-humans to be companions it is one thing, but if you look at uplifted species more as livestock it is a different one. I never really liked the idea of uplifting for Traveller, uplifting makes sense if mankind is alone amongst the stars but if there are already plenty of aliens it doesn't make much sense to create pseudo-aliens from Earth critters.

 

[BlackBat242]

In my game, the only "uplifted" Terran species is the Dolphin... specifically to aid in colonization/exploitation of water worlds.

I can see no real advantage to justify the cost/effort required to "uplift" any other species.

 

[coldwar]

well large creatures would be able to be at home with high G worlds such as Bears (Ursa) and even Elephants. This would be for mining those planets as we humans will want to try and stay feeling normal (not so sick all the time).

 

[Brian Smaller]

Or how about a Douglas Adams style gene-engineered cow that tells you the best bits to eat then pops out the back and shoot's itself.

 

[Ran Targas]

^ Is uplifting a non-human species easier than genetically engineering a human to fit the environment? Although I am not a geneticist, I wouldn't think so.

 

[Icosahedron]

well large creatures would be able to be at home with high G worlds such as Bears (Ursa) and even Elephants. This would be for mining those planets as we humans will want to try and stay feeling normal (not so sick all the time).

Otters would be a better choice. The last characteristic you want on a high G world is high mass.

 

[FreeTrav]

"Easier" might not be the issue - there might be 'ethical' or 'religious' (read: political) restrictions involved, and producing gene-mod humans might not be an option. No, I will not post examples of what I mean; I have no intention of introducing present-day politics on hot-button topics into a Traveller forum.

 

[Max]

Is uplifting a non-human species easier than genetically engineering a human to fit the environment? Although I am not a geneticist, I wouldn't think so.

Well there is that pesky little 'sapiens' thing that is found in homo sap, and much like Dinsdale they may have temperment problems caused by a small fragment of brain lodged in their skulls. Also humans tend to take a long time to breed and mature. Leaving aside the ethical and political questions, purely from a logistical standpoint uplifting animals can be much easier.

Just one brief example: genengineer your average human it's 13 years before you can expect to start a 2nd generation while your first generation of genegineered otters will already be dying of old age and you can be calculating the effect on the 3rd or 4th generation of genegineered otters.