Thanks for the comments guys!
Organizing my list of beasts is something I should have done a long time ago. The two main benefits I've gotten it are:
1. Realizing that I had under-counted the number of beasts I had hit.
2. Identifying several potential beasts I haven't hit yet.
Going through the list, I've already written down 10 beasts that seem viable. I'll be in Arizona for the next few days, so I'll definitely try and hit a few while I'm out there.
I'm wondering if I should compile a similar beast list for my x-spin and x-dex beasts. Those concepts are weird, as many players seem to be reflexively against them (x-spin isn't a real thing!), but when you lead them through basic thought experiments, they change their mind. Here's an example conversation to illustrate:
Me: Double spin gets x-spin.
Player: That's not a thing.
Me: Is osis one body add harder than clipper?
Player: Of course it is!
Me: Is the amount of rotation to do an osis vs. a clipper more or less than the amount of rotation to do a spinning clipper vs. an inspinning clipper?
Player: Less I guess...
Me: Is the third spin in a triple spinning trick harder than the amount of rotation in an osis?
Player: Yes of course.
Me: Yet without x-spin, they are worth exactly the same.
Or this hypothetical conversation:
Me: Is voodoo (paradox merlin) 6 adds?
Player: No way, it's too easy.
Me: Is blur 4 adds?
Player: Yes of course.
Me: Is backside blur five adds?
Player: Well yes...
Me: So what is paradox backside blur worth?
Player: Six I guess...
Me: And what's another name for paradox backside blur?
Player: Voodoo
Like I pointed out in my last post, tricks like mullet or mindbender are way easier for me than fury or fusion, but while nobody would question a beast using mullet/mind, a lot of people will argue that a beast using fusion/fury isn't a "real" beast. Of course, trying to link adds to difficulty is a losing battle, and the whole idea of "beast" combos is completely artificial anyway. But yeah, for footbag motivation in early November, getting to 50 "pure" beasts is as good as anything.
boyle wrote:pixie motion>locomtion>x should get you about 10 new beasts.
You know, I've never done any stepping tricks out of motion. I suppose I could try, though I wonder if a more likely path to a beast would be something like food-loco-X. I'll give them both a shot, but I'll probably spend more time on my current list of low-hanging-fruit beasts, since none of them require learning new links per se.
boyle wrote:How is your blurry whirling swirl? I don't see that on the list anywhere.
My BWS is OK, but maybe not at the level where I could use it in a beast. I can hit it both sides, but I've never hit it BSOS, so that speaks to my level of consistency with it. Based on that, it'd probably have to be the first trick in a beast for me, and almost certainly linked to a downtime six like mullet. I can give it a shot.
In 24 hours I should be at the airport, waiting to get on my flight to Tucson. I'm excited to see my family, and also just take a few days off work. If I can record some family history, get in some shreds in the sun, and eat some good food, it'll be a great trip.