HOME | DD
CreaturemasterProds — Stripe Strike
#alien #aliens #equestrian #horse #zebra #ben10 #omnitrix #ben10omniverse #omnitrixalien
Published: 2016-11-16 03:37:17 +0000 UTC; Views: 8657; Favourites: 105; Downloads: 784
Redirect to original
Description
One of but a series of aliens requested by by yours truly!Onto the facts!
Name: Stripe Strike
Species: Equestrisapien
Homeworld: Equestra
Powers/abilities: Stripe Strike possesses incredible speed, capable of reaching speeds of nearly 300 mph in less than a few seconds.
Stripe Strike's namesake however, is due to his ability to confuse and disorient with the stripes on his body. By rapidly dashing back and forth or running around enemies, the stripes along his body fade into an indiscernible blur that make it impossible for foes to accurately hit him. The effects last long after Stripe Strike has even stopped running, causing victims to stumble about in a drunken-like fashion while aimlessly trying to hit things that vaguely resemble an Equestrisapien.
Equestrisapiens are agile and have fast reflexes.
Equestrisapiens are capable of scaling up vertical surfaces and sticking to walls thanks to their specially evolved hooves.
Stripe Strike's hooves are strong enough to punch a hole clean through solid steel with a well aimed kick.
Weaknesses: Stripe Strike tires out rather quickly and can only run in short, quick bursts similar to cheetahs.
Equestrisapiens are naturally skittish aliens and are easily startled by loud noises and things with sharp teeth and claws, making them absolutely terrified of Appoplexians, Vulpimancers, and Loboans. This is an attribute that Stripe Strike also possess, making him rather difficult to work with when in the presence of opponents with similar features.
Equestrisapiens can be confused and disoriented by each other's stripes if they aren't careful.
Stripe Strike has trouble running and stopping on slippery surfaces such as ice, water, and oil.
Trivia: The species name and homeworld comes from the taxonomic family name for the domestic horse, Equidae.
Stripe Strike bears a slight resemblance to the Zebra Creature Power Suit from Wild Kratts.
Equestra is actually a large moon that orbits around an uninhabitable planet - Equestra Omega - and is covered in vast expanses of grass and open savanna. These plains however, are riddled with massive canyons and gyres that reach all the way down to the moon's molten crust and the islands between them are often full of highly vicious predators that will readily attack Equestrisapiens on sight. For this reason, they live high up on easily defendable plateaus and only venture out during the day when their senses have the advantage.
Equestrisapiens are incredibly wary of outsiders - much like the Sentinelese people on Earth - and have resisted any and all contact with visitors from beyond their home world. The Plumbers and Galvans have tried numerous times to make contact with them and inform them of their place in the universe in hopes of establishing a place for them in the galactic community. Unfortunately, all attempts thus far have been met with great hostility and an obscene amount of projectile weaponry that is readily fired at anyone or anything that ventures down to Equestra's surface. Any drones have been shot down and never recovered and anyone that lingers too long on Equestra's surface will find themselves quickly stranded and dismembered by the local wildlife or tribes, whichever comes first.
Azmuth himself admits that he may have upset the Equestrisapiens when he gathered a sample of their DNA for the Codon Stream, unintentionally making them uneasy around visitors to their home world.
Related content
Comments: 33
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
👍: 1 ⏩: 0
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I what would an Ultimate Version of this form be like?
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Is the name Grevizian another name for the alien species name Equestrisapien?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
No, I just forgot to completely change the name when revamping Stripe Strike's bio.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I wonder if he can generate a huge shockwave with a single stomp of his hoof like Gorgon from the Marvel comics.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
No, Stripe Strike can't do that. This is meant to be one of the less useful aliens in the Omnitrix, one of those that has a specific combination of skills that might prove to be useful in specific situations that would otherwise require a number of aliens to fulfill. Other than that specific situation, there are aliens in the Omnitrix that easily outclass him, such as XLR8 when it comes to sheer speed.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
...I absolutely love this freaking alien. Not only did you take the whole "zebra stripes blend the animals together so that lions can't lock on a target" thing and make it an ability, but you did it in such a unique and fascinating way that makes what could've been a rather basic alien both incredibly useful and fantastic for more comedic episodes and fight scenes (just imagining him taking down a second-rate Negative Ten team in seconds by letting them stumble around uselessly is making me chuckle).
Adding onto all that, another lovely detail is the usage of the wariness of the Sentinelese. As someone who loves learning about the people, their culture and the mythology of other countries, the reference is highly appreciated (though I admit it's a little odd that the secretive nature of Indian people were used for an alien based on an animal native to Africa...I can ignore it though, since any representation of culture is cool with me).
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yeah, the original request was to make an alien based on a zebra with speed powers but, considering we already have XLR8 and Fasttrack and the later is already an XLR8 clone with nothing particularly setting him apart (they even have the same color scheme for crying out loud), I needed something to make Stripe Strike more interesting. Thus, I made his speed bursts powerful, but short lived, and added the blurring effect that zebras naturally have (hard to believe that zebras are actually black with white stripes and that the reason they evolved that color in the first place - despite it seemingly being a complete eyesore on a savanna where everything is either green or brown - was that most of their predators are actually colorblind).
Well, I figured that there were some aliens who weren't particularly welcoming to offworlders and when I first thought of the concept of them being a significantly less civilized species, I was instantly reminded of the Sentinelese people. That being said, how can we be sure they're Indian in the first place if no one can get close enough to them without getting killed (believe me, they don't hesitate to use force if people get too close)?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Oh God, Fasttrack...I hate that alien so much...
Things like that are why I love the natural world so much. Most people look at an animal and see them as simply feral beasts, while I look at every animal and see the complexities that keep them alive. Everything from the extremely risky methods of deterring predators from Poison Dart Frogs (sticking out like a sore thumb so that a predator knows their toxic), to the Mimic Octopus' ability to mimic over two dozen creatures for various purposes. Spectacular Spider-Man's version of Doctor Octopus was dead right when he said that the animal kingdom is an excellent source for inspiration.
I presume that they are a group of Indian People because that makes the most sense to me personally. For all I know, they could be descendants of stranded British Invaders, or an offshoot of another Asian country's people.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I know, right? I mean seriously, compared to most animals, we're nothing but toothpicks!
Elephants have tectonic sensors in their feet that they can use to communicate with one another over miles without making a sound that we can hear or detect incoming earthquakes and tsunamis (which is why it is advised to follow the elephants if you happen to be in India or Thailand), the Axolotl can not only regenerate pretty much any part of its body, but even reattach lost limbs including their heads, and immortal jellyfish can quite literally live forever if they don't get eaten; they just revert back to their youngest stage of development and start their life cycle all over again!
I doubt they're British Invaders (since it's at least been seen that they have dark skin in comparison to lighter shades), but they may just be another off shoot of another country, although I'm pretty sure they've been there since long before human civilization rose. What gets me is how they haven't managed to discover fire yet if they have to wait for a lightning strike to hit something they can reach (maybe they just choose not to use it?).
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I couldn't agree more, and yet, we still cause so much harm to them.
Yes, I find the Axolotl in particular to be fascinating because it feels like something than belongs in the Devonian or Sularian Periods, rather than the modern day due to how bizarre it is.
(On another note; do you think that the tectonic sensor ability than real-world elephants have should be incorporated into Trumbipolar? At the very least it would give him a minor upgrade.)
...Most of the sources I have read have stated that they can use fire, though mostly for cooking. Anyway, maybe they're just a special kind of human that evolved specifically on that island? It would explain the hostility, as while Neanderthals and the like were much more friendly than pop culture portrays them like, they were still born hunters and attacked any who appeared as a threat. If the Sentinelese evolved around the same time, then it would make sense that they followed a similar territorial mindset.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I think it's pretty safe to say that Trumbipulor's species would possess that ability (along with either their prehistoric or Ultimate form resembling a woolly mammoth in some regard. It just makes sense).
I know, right? And then you have tardigrades, the most indestructible animal in all of existence! Seriously nothing seems to bother theses guys. They survive temperatures above boiling and temperatures below absolute zero, to the point where atoms stop moving and these little guys just keep trudging along like it's nobodies business; cells literally explode or are shredded at those levels! They can go for years without any sort of sustenance - the record being 120 years - and can even survive the cold vacuum of space without a problem, even giving birth to perfectly normal little babies while doing so! It's gotten to the point where some people think they're actually aliens!
That at all being said, they probably diverted from 'normal' human evolution when our ancestors were traveling out of Africa and went separate ways when given the choice to follow herds of prey going along the Indian coast or up towards Europe. Growing up on a remote island off the coast of India probably meant that, compared to the ancient Aboriginals that settled in Australia and had to put up with the likes of Megalania and the marsupial lion, they probably had few megafauna carnivores or megafauna in general to require a need of fire, which probably led to their 'late start' compared to the rest of the human species. I can't really say myself, as I'm no archaeologist.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Eh, I would've gone with the Colombian Mammoth or Platybelodon, if only to save the Woolly Mammoth for another alien, but I guess it's a stock animal for a reason.
Really, the tardigrade alone could be used as the inspiration for over a dozen species of alien. It's just so unnatural and bizarre that it honestly feels like it belongs on another planet.
That sounds like the most likely scenario actually. I mean, what could've lived there that posed a genuine threat that could compare to Megalania? Maybe some form of python?
(Sorry for taking almost two days to respond. I've been very busy working on my new project, and I'm trying to carve out the perfect set of arcs for it without the segways feeling forced, plus I've been doing some research on the Triassic Period for another idea I had the other day, since I want it to be as accurate as possible)
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I think the Megalania was the largest terrestrial predator in Australia at the time, the one place where reptiles still ruled the Earth after the dinosaurs went extinct.
And, hey, don't worry about it. That new project you're working on, that's the one that has the girl that can turn into animals, right? The Triassic Period . . . ah, yes, when dinosaurs hadn't yet stolen the crown from the synapsids and ungainly, awkward animals that the rest of the Triassic Period fauna most likely laughed and scoffed at before their untimely demise (and to think, that was even worse than the KT-extinction).
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
True. I mean, what real competition did Megalania have? The Demon Duck? The Giant Kangaroo? Seriously, Megalania was the Golden Child of large terrestrial Australian wildlife back in the day. Shame it went extinct. (unless you believe the conspiracy theories about them living in secret colonies...)
Okay then, good to know.
Yes, the project is about a shape-shifting girl, though she can also turn into any living plant or human (she prefers animals though).
Yeah, the Triassic is a weird yet wonderful era in the history of Earth's life that is mostly under the radar, with most people only knowing the Triassic as "the setting of the first episode of Walking With Dinosaurs". That weirdness and uniqueness is why I'm focusing on this era in particular, as WWD, while fun, got a lot of things wrong and only spent a single episode in the Triassic before going on to over-size Jurassic Pliosaurs, feature European Utahraptors and become arguably the only Paleo-Documentary ever to feature a Tyrannosaurus without it fighting a Triceratops, and the Triassic deserves much more love than the show gave it. After the Triassic, I'll likely look into the Silurian and the Devonian, as Sea Monsters and Walking With Monsters didn't represent those time periods too well in my opinion, and then head to the Eocene.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Really now? If you haven't already, might I suggest watching the first, second, fifth, and sixth Animal Armageddon episodes? They give a pretty detailed explanation for the Ordivician, Devonian, and Triassic extinctions (the other episodes in the mini-series focus on the classic KT-extinction, the Pleistocene era - namely the eruption of a super volcano - and a theoretical episode that explores what might happen if the asteroid that sent the dinosaurs spiraling into extinction hit New York in the present day), namely the animals that would go extinct (at least the most note worthy), the adaptations the survivors had to ride out through the mass extinctions, and then what exactly evolved to fill in all the empty niches left over.
And to be fair, our knowledge of the prehistoric past is advancing every year. Feathered dinosaurs is only a recent concept after all (as in it's one that's now widely accepted by most people not of the scientific community, even though there are a few stubborn people that just can't look at the facts) and we only recently figured out what Spinosaurus actually looked like (the equivalent of a prehistoric, semi-aquatic wiener dog, unfortunately).
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I have heard of Animal Armageddon before, but I never got around to looking into it. I'll check it out sometime after June (my exams start in two weeks and wrap up in late June, so I can't dedicate much time to watching documentaries until then).
Feathers may be a relatively recent concept (the theories and Paleo-Art have been around since the eighties, and evidence of it started to show up during the nineties and 2000s), but that wasn't what I meant when I mentioned inaccuracies. I was talking about the baby-eating Coelophysis, the misplaced and quadrupedal Plateosaurus (Peteinosaurus is forgivable in its misplacement due to its ability to fly), the quadrupedal Postosuchus and the Time-Displaced Cynodont.
...Am I the only one who likes the 2014 Spinosaurus reconstruction more than the older one? Seriously, It's like a combination of a Crocodile and a Dimetrodon and (In my opinion) it looks cooler than an oversized Suchomimus with an Ouranosaurus sail stuck on its back. I understand that it can take some getting used to (it took me a while as well), but it's been almost three years since the reveal of the new design, and I think it's time that we stopped harping on about it.
(Edit: I apologise if I came off as aggressive there, it's just that the old Spinosaurus never really grabbed me)
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I hear that. I'm graduating this May, so the homework and final exams are gonna be cramming my every waking moment, not to mention the necessity to get a job and my driver's license (as my parents continue to remind me over . . . and over . . . and over . . . and over again . . .).
I'm not sure what's wrong with a baby-eating Coelophysis, considering its size. It's no apex predator like an Allosaurus or anything, so it probably ate a diet consisting of smaller animals, dinosaurs, and eggs, which could have also included hatchlings. I mean, I know there are a lot of inconsistencies in the scientific community when it comes to dinosaurs since it's always changing as new discoveries are unearthed and the general public doesn't really seem to want to change their views on something that they've been so awe-inspired by since they were children. Seriously, I'm pretty sure out of all the animals to have ever lived on his Earth up until this point, dinosaurs have been the ones that have inspired hundreds of generations of people in some manner or other; they may be extinct, but they'll never die out in our hearts (cheesy, I know).
I think the reason people have such a hard time adjusting to Spinosaurus' new appearance is that people naturally like things that are big and impressive. As stated in Jurassic World, they want something that's "bigger, better, and with a lot more teeth" and we got that when Jurassic Park III rolled around. And then when that awesome monster got turned into a literal wiener dog of a dinosaur, people naturally disliked it. It's why people were so skeptical when scientists were pushing the fluffy dino theory despite the physical and undeniable evidence: it just made dinosaurs seem less impressive, especially when it was discovered that T.rex - aka the King of the Dinosaurs - most likely had feathers, too, and not just as a hatchling. Granted, it seems that people agree that fluffy dinosaurs can be just as scary and cool if not more than their 'naked' predecessors, but Spinosaurus is just one of those cases where it's going to take people some time to adjust to something that they've always known as truth being false.
It's kinda like being told that you've been making and eating peanut butter and jelly sandwiches the wrong way your entire life. It's hard to adjust to it.
Even some of my own readers have denounced the fluffy dino theory when I put a feathered Tyrannosaurus Rex in one of stories, despite all the hard evidence!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Replace May with June and Getting a Job/Driver's License with studying so that I'm not forced to do what can essentially be called grunt work for the rest of my life and we would have the same issue.
Cannibalistic Coelophysis is currently a debunked theory, as the evidence they had for it was proven to be some sort of lizard, and not an actual baby Coelophysis. It's still possible, but highly unlikely.
I still argue that three years is long enough to accept the new look for Spinosaurus, but I get what you mean. It's kinda why I have a bitter look towards the Jurassic Park Franchise in general. So many people look at the films, books and games and say "this is accurate, and nothing you say and do will convince me otherwise". Frilled, Venom-Spitting Dilophosaurus, Bare-Bodied, Oversized Velociraptors, Bare-Bodied Gallimimus, Bare-Bodied Tyrannosaurus, Spiked-Sided Ankylosaurus, and now, Bipedal Spinosaurus. Pop Culture has accepted all of these due to the Jurassic Park Fandom's overall refusal to accept the scientific truth, and that vocal side of the fandom has enough power to control the accuracy of future films. This is a severe limiter for the franchise, as eventually people will want more Mesozoic animals in the films, and the filmmakers will be more and more stuck as more animals are revealed to have feathers and quills. As of now, Therizinosaurs, Dromaeosaurids, Ornithomimids, Tyrannosaurs, Hypsilophodonts and possibly Ceratopsids all have feathers in relation to them, and many people presume that Sauropods, Spinosaurs and Hadrosaurs are the same. So far, they've managed to play things relatively safely, but eventually it's all going to fall apart.
It may just be me, but long-lasting changes don't really bother me that much (that may be why I'm not as panicky about Brexit, Trump as President, or any of the other major changes that have happened over the past year), as I always just try to move forward despite the constant changes, not seeing the point of freaking out over it. I remember when I first saw the news about Yutyrannus' discovery. I didn't flip out over out or get defensive over my own personal nostalgia; I just thought it was interesting and moved on.
See, this is something I'll just never truly grasp. If there is evidence towards feathered dinosaurs that spans across several continents and numerous discoveries spanning back to the eighties and nineties, why denounce the existence of the aforementioned feathered dinosaur and complain about when someone uses the evidence to construct an image in a story (this is me assuming that the feathers were just brought up in a description of the dinosaur)?! It's pointless and oozes bias on the commentator's behalf.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well, we know that some tyrannosaurs were cannibals (or at least didn't hesitate to kill one another if they got into a fight) and some animals that are alive today are in fact cannibals (I can't list any off the top of my head at the moment). As you yourself said, it's possible but until further notice, the theory is debunked and well, a dinosaur.
In all honesty, the only Jurassic Park-biased arguments I've heard as of lately is the 'naked' dinos and gigantic Velociraptors theory (I have yet to meet anyone who still believes Dilophosaurus spat venom). We all know that the reason the Jurassic Park franchise keeps its dinosaurs naked is because - even though we know it's wrong - it's just a nice sense of nostalgia. That, and they regrettably know that they might not make as much of a profit if their dinos were fluffy and covered in feathers, even though that arguably makes them more terrifying; imagine, you come across this feathered dinosaur the size of a turkey and you think "oh, hey, that's not dangerous. It's kinda cute, actually", but that's when you notice the sickle claw . . . the razor sharp teeth . . . and the fact that there are easily a dozen of them all circling around you with a hungry look in their eye . . .
I think the reason people were so hung up on Yutyrannus' discovery (I'll admit, I was a little too) is because it finally proves that dinosaurs as large as a Tyrannosaurus Rex can still have feathers into their adult stages, instead of just being hatched out as fluffy chicks that steadily lost their feathers over time as a vast majority of people still thought/hoped. I'll admit, I'm still a tad skeptical on Ceratopsians having being covered from horn to tail in feathers (I'm talking about Triceratops and Styracosaurus), though I can easily imagine the smaller, more bipedal species having them.
Until evidence is proven, I doubt saurpods, spinosaurs, and hadrosaurs had feathers mostly because a good majority of those animals are already big and probably don't need them to keep warm and probably didn't use them for display either (hadrosaurs probably used their elaborate crests for communication and mating purposes).
And yeah, the feathered T.rex was for a description. I gave it a mane of feathers (think a little like Tyrantrum from Pokemon) to sort of have a balance between the 'naked' and fluffy dino lovers to keep them happy. It worked for most people, save a few stubborn . . . idiots. I hesitate in calling my readers idiots because, as moronic as some of them may be, I'm only where I am today because of their constant support and patience with my tardiness of posting chapters.
I guess until we invent a time machine and can travel back far enough to see a fluffy Tyrannosaurus Rex (I know there's a shorter way to say it, but the name just rolls of the tongue in such a pleasing manner), some people will remain annoying skeptics.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Fair point.
Trust me, I remember when Jurassic World was coming out two years ago pretty much every inaccuracy I mentioned was brought up to me at least once without a hint of sarcasm (People see me as "The Dinosaur Guy" for some reason, and like to bring the subject up as much as possible), and when I tried to explain the truth to them, they didn't believe me (I specifically remember two big arguments I had with people over the accuracy of the name "Pteranodon", as they continue to think that it should be called "Pterodactyl", and another about the whole feathered dinosaurs debate).
If people want nostalgia, then they can read the books, watch the films and play the games. I appreciate the feeling of nostalgia, but if I want to feel the rush of it, I take another look at the stuff I'm feeling nostalgia for. If I'm feeling nostalgic about the TMNT, I watch the 2003 series, If I'm feeling nostalgic about Pokemon, I watch the Original Series and play the games I grew up with, and If I'm feeling nostalgic about Jurassic Park, I watch the movie again and watch Let's Plays of Jurassic Park: Operation Genesis. My childhood wasn't ruined by the Michael Bay TMNT Film, the Unova Series of the Anime, or Jurassic World. Why? Because even though all these were mediocre products, they were not released when I was a child, and as such they cannot ruin it. At most, they can taint my view of the franchise they are a part of, but that doesn't erase my memories of the stuff I liked. I'm sorry for going on a rant there, but the "My childhood was ruined by ______" argument really gets on my nerves.
Exactly. I can just imagine the reactions you'd get from seeing Dakotaraptor or Therizinosaurus on the big screen. If Jurassic Park won't allow their dinosaurs to have dinosaurs, then we need someone to stand up and make a blockbuster that is accurate to the current understanding of prehistoric animals that is just as beloved as the original Jurassic Park, both critically and financially.
Eh on both for me. I'm fine with the feathered Tyrannosaurus rex and I'm fine with the quill-coated Triceratops horridus. Both make sense to me, and both make for some amazing Paleo-Art (seriously, some of the art I've seen on DeviantArt alone looks like it was sketched based on sequences right in front of them, it's gotten that good), but if both were debunked permanently I would accept it and move on.
The "these animals were big enough" argument doesn't really work when Tyrannosaurus rex and Yutyrannus both have feathers on them at full size, but I do agree on Hadrosaurs using their crests for communication and mating displays.
Ah, I remember back in 2015 I started working on a prehistoric animal-themed project as my first ever book that featured a Tyrannosaurus rex (you're right, it does roll off the tongue exceptionally well) with a neck-mane covered in blue/orange/yellow/red feathers, as well as feathers on the legs, tail, arms and upper head. At the time, I was determined to make an accurate-to-life version of Jurassic Park, which I turned into some sort of weird wibbly-wobbly timey-wimey thing that probably wasn't going to go anywhere, so I've just left it by the wayside to focus on my new projects.
I understand why you want to be patient with your readers, but if they're being whiny about such a minor detail that ultimately doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things, then it's best to let them know that they're wasting their time complaining. I wouldn't call them idiots though, as that can really come off as pretentious from the standpoint of someone who wasn't complaining.
Sadly, you're right there. This is why we need a real-life version of Prehistoric Park...
👍: 0 ⏩: 0