>>117113586Well it simply a matter of showing how the nature of something differs. Being humanoid has nothing to do with anything.
Shit like how they release bonding chemicals, procreate and decide territory is more central to a society than their body shape.
I did have to look up a bunch of shit for that answer though so cheers for the topic.
Still there's plenty of things like birds and crocodiles who would be incompatible with warfare. Supposing they became intelligent enough to understand the benefits of trade and shared martial force many birds just dealk with their issues in non-violent ways and crocodiles choose to live in their own pockets of territory killing any pretenders and or mating them. They kill their own kids to boot - fresh out of the eggs no less. They're basically in built population control.
I'd imagine Saurians as ancap or Morrowind's Telvanni. Even if they cooperated they'd be disinclined to be around each other more than completely neccesary and they'd have no ethical qualms about murder, instead tying it to land rights.
The origin of humanity was in pair bonding, territory scirmishes with the boys and hyper-social troupe interaction. You can see how we'd be inclined to cliques that kill each other.
I don't know enough about frogs, toads and newts to have much to say on how they're depicted here (obviously just as humans that look like animals) but the thought is sticking with me. It'd be neat to imagine how they might actually act
