Question regarding possible evolution of a sapient quadruped specie

[System Ufera]

(I posted this same thing on Sciforums, but I think I should also ask for input here)

Hello, everyone! As some of you may or may not be aware, I'm designing, from the ground up, a Pen and Paper Roleplaying Game. One of the unique things about my game is the way it blurs the line between Fantasy and Sci-Fi genres: even though the vast majority of the game's setting is fantastical in theme, it all functions on principles which are defined by the natural laws of the setting; for example, wizards in my game are actually scientists, who just happen to apply their knowledge using energy produced and controlled by the mind (as opposed to more conventional technology). Given this design goal, I want to ensure that every aspect of my game and its setting accurately represents the physics and such of the universe it takes place in, and so I want at least an adequate amount of explanation for everything.

Now, one idea that's been floating around in my head for a while is the possibility that I might actually include in my game a playable (and thus of sapient intelligence) race of quadrupeds. The problem with this is that I would need an explanation for how the race came to be. There are two possible explanations for this: evolution and engineering. The problem with engineering is that I've already decided that at least three of the races in my game are engineered, and I don't want to become too reliant on this explanation. This leaves evolution.

The problem with evolution, as I have learned from reading a while back about why dolphins aren't smarter than us, is that a quadruped specie, having no opposable digits with which to apply sapient intelligence, would gain less of an advantage from being intelligent than a specie with opposable digits, and thus it would have less of an incentive to evolve intelligence. This leaves me with the following question: What other factors could apply, which would incentivize a specie to evolve intelligence, and which would do so enough to at least make up for the lack of opposable digits?

 

[edemaitre]

Sentient quadrupeds

If you read some of the latest scientific studies or transhumanist science fiction such as David Brin's "Uplift" novels, you'd see that the distinctions between animal intelligence and human sentience aren't as big as previously assumed. Yes, tool use is an issue, but some dolphins create sonar "nets" to herd fish, elephants have dexterous trunks, and parrots and ravens use their beaks and talons as well as tools. And we're just beginning to appreciate the capabilities of octopi....

Staying away from fantasy races like centaurs, it should still be possible to envision a sentient quadruped capable of manipulating tools. Elephants are probably your best model. Changing and varied environments put pressure on species to adapt, and an agile mouth, forelimbs, or even antlers or tusks could enable the use of tools.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Take a look at Pierson's Puppeteers as an example. Herd animals, herbivores, quadruped-like (OK, they're tripods), but still with a way to manipulate their environment to explain their intelligence.

 

[System Ufera]

If you read some of the latest scientific studies or transhumanist science fiction such as David Brin's "Uplift" novels, you'd see that the distinctions between animal intelligence and human sentience aren't as big as previously assumed. Yes, tool use is an issue, but some dolphins create sonar "nets" to herd fish, elephants have dexterous trunks, and parrots and ravens use their beaks and talons as well as tools. And we're just beginning to appreciate the capabilities of octopi....

Staying away from fantasy races like centaurs, it should still be possible to envision a sentient quadruped capable of manipulating tools. Elephants are probably your best model. Changing and varied environments put pressure on species to adapt, and an agile mouth, forelimbs, or even antlers or tusks could enable the use of tools.

Take a look at Pierson's Puppeteers as an example. Herd animals, herbivores, quadruped-like (OK, they're tripods), but still with a way to manipulate their environment to explain their intelligence.

Huh... And here I was, thinking that simply having an explanation for a sapient quadruped race was going to push the limits of outlandish creativity, which is especially surprising considering the fact that my game already has both a small elephant-like race equipped with auxiliary brains stored in their bellies, and a race of minotaur-like autogamous hermaphrodites who instinctively view themselves as mother figures to their allies, both to be included in the core player's handbook.

I suppose, for the purposes of the original question and what I was originally imagining, it would have been better to ask for information regarding the evolution of a specie that simply did not have fine manipulation abilities (or at least, to the degree that we humans have), especially since I was also planning to follow up on this thread with another thread asking what sort of special mechanics would apply to such a race. Personally, I'm still leaning toward keeping with this concept, but at least now I have other options to go with, just in case this leads nowhere.

 

[Umbran]

...which is especially surprising considering the fact that my game already has both a small elephant-like race equipped with auxiliary brains stored in their bellies,

See the Fithp, from Larry Niven's novel, Footfall for small elephantine sentient creatures.

I suppose, for the purposes of the original question and what I was originally imagining, it would have been better to ask for information regarding the evolution of a specie that simply did not have fine manipulation abilities

Well, it is important to note that we don't have "information", as we have no examples of such that we know of. We only have speculation about how it could happen.

We then have questions - what do you mean by "fine manipulation". Parrots, ravens, and crows do a whole lot of manipulation with beak, claw (and, in the parrot's case, tongue). These are also pretty smart birds. Dolphins don't do much physical manipulation of objects, but they do a lot or manipulation of prey with aggressive sonar. A group of hunting dolphins are... sort of like playing soccer with the prey as the ball, a complex interaction.

You then get the issue of - if a creature is smart enough for fine manipulation, if there are individuals who are better at it, they will tend to survive better, such that if the species brains are capable of it, over evolutionary timescales they may be apt to develop the ability.

The key note for intelligence is this - it costs a lot of energy. The human brain burns up something like 20% of our body's energy budget. If you aren't using it for something valuable, that extra energy burn is a competitive disadvantage. So, for any creature you want to be smart, there should be some way for it to *use* those smarts. Their behaviors should be complex - whether those be social behaviors, or interactions with the environment that don't include direct physical manipulation.

But, in game terms you may be setting yourself for an issue - how many people are going to be interested in playing a character with very limited interactions with the environment? It sounds cool as a concept, but the player may end up feeling like they spend most of their time, well, sitting on their hands.

 

[System Ufera]

See the Fithp, from Larry Niven's novel, Footfall for small elephantine sentient creatures.

Ah, sorry. I forgot to include the word "anthropomorphic" in the description of the race. The race I was talking about is bipedal, and has hands (the hands, by the way, have three fingers and two thumbs, as opposed to the four-one ratio of humans).

We then have questions - what do you mean by "fine manipulation". Parrots, ravens, and crows do a whole lot of manipulation with beak, claw (and, in the parrot's case, tongue). These are also pretty smart birds. Dolphins don't do much physical manipulation of objects, but they do a lot or manipulation of prey with aggressive sonar. A group of hunting dolphins are... sort of like playing soccer with the prey as the ball, a complex interaction.

I was mostly thinking that a character of a hypothetical quadruped race might use the mouth to manipulate objects, which I had thought would not be as effective as using digits which exist for specifically that purpose. However, you seem to be saying that this isn't necessarily the case, or that even if it is, it wouldn't be as much of a limiting factor as I had thought, so... problem solved? Is it solved?

But, in game terms you may be setting yourself for an issue - how many people are going to be interested in playing a character with very limited interactions with the environment? It sounds cool as a concept, but the player may end up feeling like they spend most of their time, well, sitting on their hands.

Like I said, I feel that the issue of how the race would play would be better addressed in a separate thread.

 

[Umbran]

I was mostly thinking that a character of a hypothetical quadruped race might use the mouth to manipulate objects, which I had thought would not be as effective as using digits which exist for specifically that purpose. However, you seem to be saying that this isn't necessarily the case, or that even if it is, it wouldn't be as much of a limiting factor as I had thought, so... problem solved? Is it solved?

No, it was a question - what do you consider "no fine manipulation"?

I don't think a parrot is going to be, say, smithing iron with its beak. But then, we get things like this:

http://www.wimp.com/crowsolves/

Like I said, I feel that the issue of how the race would play would be better addressed in a separate thread.

I think you may want to work that out *first* though - don't worry about how you do it until you figure out whether or not you should bother doing it.

 

[System Ufera]

No, it was a question - what do you consider "no fine manipulation"?

Ah, I got so caught up in the examples from the rest of that paragraph that I completely neglected to address the first sentence! When I say "fine manipulation," I'm talking about things like fingers; basically, a collection of relatively thin, moderately-to-highly flexible digits, or a substitute which can perform the same tasks with comparable effectiveness, (telekinesis, perhaps?), and with bonus points if the parts are used primarily for the manipulation of the world around oneself, or otherwise if using the parts for manipulation would not interfere with their primary purpose (for example, if you manipulated things with your neck, and doing so prevented you from breathing, that would not be good).

I think you may want to work that out *first* though - don't worry about how you do it until you figure out whether or not you should bother doing it.

Well, I'm kind of already heeding the advice in the second half of what you said there. If I put in the work to define a concept mechanically, regardless of how good or bad the results of that work may be, it'll be wasted if the concept the mechanics apply to has no place or explanation in the setting of my game.

That's why, for example, I probably won't design for my game a weapon consisting of a laser that is both powered and controlled by epic guitar solos - on its own, such a device would require a means of transforming awesomeness into usable energy, perhaps via some kind of biological reaction involving adrenaline, and I highly doubt that such a power source could produce enough energy, or do so promptly enough, for the laser to be useful. The other possibility would be divine magic, but that would just mean that the deity hears, and is pleased by, your music, and rewards you by zapping your enemies with the deity's own laser beams.