[quote=TwistedSun]
1) Fairly Homogeneous? I said they looked alike only in face and colors. Take as example eastern ethnicity if you are from Europe or America. I find personally challenging distinguishing one face from another, and they look practically identical to me in some cases. In fact, I mentioned how different the thing goes for those who are used to it.But really, Sayans? Couldn't you find a more politically-correct comparison? Slender, tall, with light hairs and skin, and you go think of sayans and not elves? Anyway, leaving jokes aside, I think you got the wrong image: they are not necessarily beautiful, paragons of grace and elegance. They are human-like; imperfection is common.[/quote]

Then you could have worded it differently, because the way you made them out they're all the clones with all the same characteristics too easily associated with human beauty. Especially the qualities of contemporary beauty which sets off alarm-bells of sexual fantasy over an entire race on broad physical pretenses, added with the light complexion of their hair and skin which often embodies Aryan or Scandinavian beauty.

[quote]2) Subjectivity probably betrayed me again. I personally find wings of any kind (even bat ones) really beautiful and appealing. Any way, they have no aesthetic purpose; they are used and intended, obviously, to fly. And when i said furry, I apologize, because I lacked some knowledge. I meant, for furry, similar to the juvenile plumage of penguins' cubs.[/quote]
You realize wings with elaborate hair or feathers as you're looking for don't actually work, right? Fluff means a lot of added material in the wind which means extra weight. And when a thing in flight is to have a optimal proportion of body weight to wing length (and strength), you add more to the problem by fluffing up the wing's structure by adding more useless feathers or hairs which don't do anything, in much the same way a baby bird can not fly (not just because it doesn't have the strength, but because the feathers themselves are also too bulky and loose).

And to add working wings also implies physically that they're no longer very lean, as you want. When it comes to wings you got to remember you're adding a whole extra set of limbs and muscle structure to the existing human skeleton.

[quote]
3) Removing magic mows the basic concept of fantasy for me. Semi/Realistic medieval stories are not the same thing.Probably the best thing is to force every player to spit out right away every spell they intend to use, so that no problems are created when the Roleplay actually starts.Last thing: since I feel a tacit and mocking sarcasm beneath your words (may be of course only my imagination), may i ask you to keep a more neutral tone?
[/quote]

You do realize you can have fantasy with minimal or not magic involved right? A Song of Ice and Fire? Though magic comes up in a way there, it's physically very minimal and not present on the surface. It's not to the tier of Harry Potter. And: it works.

Even the roll of magic in Lord of the Rings is pretty much rolled back, with the wizards of the world being few and far between and involving themselves in more proportional things.