That's pretty amazing! Very good job!! I like it.

Khoamera already exist
They're called Chimera
They can shapeshift and have the characteristics of many animals.
See also: Manticore

Chimera can't shapeshift, the only form they have is a lion with a goat s head on its back and a snakes head for a tail. They can also breathe fire.

Manticore, a lions body with the head of a man and tail of a scorpion or dragon.

Neither of those creatures can shift parts of their body at will, and have only one form.

Khaomera is a play on the word Chimera, but they are not the same thing. The only thing they have in common are the fact that they are made up of more than one animal or species, that is all.

Much like humans, furries, and any other animal in existence, Chimera and Manticore have many different sub-species and abilities, the most common of which is the lion,ox,bird head with a snake tail, which uses fire lightning ice and sheer force.

HOWEVER

I must admit that this picture is fucking awesome

Where do you get your sources?
Neither originally have those things, the chimera was a singular animal that was of greek origin and defeated. Any sub-species for both creatures were created by others who had an idea or wanted to do something different.

http://bestiary.ca/beasts/beast177.htm - for the manticore

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimera_(mythology) - for chimera.

I get my sources from the fact that mythical creatures and monsters are fake, so there are no "facts."
I'm the vampire guy, not the Greek guy, so I don't know a -whole- lot about Greek and Roman creatures.
I'm the vampire/werewolf guy.

'fake' doesn't matter. Monsters stem from myth, just because it's fake doesn't mean someone should disregard their roots in history.
Am I wrong in thinking that you'd get defensive of vampires or werewolves if people misstated some points of accuracy from their origins. Or if a person thought a werewolf and furry were the same creature? How about a vampire and a chupacabra?

Point being, while those things may be similar they are not the same thing.

Now I'm curious as to what you know about vampires and werewolves.

Just about everything, as I was obsessed with them as a child.
I played games, watched old-school and new-school movies, read books...
That's why I hate this crap coming out now, like Twilight and Underworld, which are just trying to capitalize on Vampiric and Lycanthropic lore.
Werewolves, I am less knowledgeable of, but I still know quite a bit to piece together some "facts."
As for getting offended if somebody says something like... "All vampires can turn into bats and mist and wolves," I don't really get offended so much as I just correct them.

Eh, I suppose it might only happen if one was trying to create another species derived from one in existence (for example, the khaomera are a genetically created species that are mutations from the chimera gene. Its a long idea that plays on the creatures idea, just changed to respect the original myth.)
I agree, I am not a huge fan of Twilight. Underworld is entertaining, but the movies are just terrible. Same for Van Helsing.

Some books that are out I don't really mind, they are fun in a way. Though the Vampire Files by P.N. Elrod are rather accurate, and nice read. The book of NOD is also a favorite of mine, and unfortunately I have yet to come across and good werewolf novels.

that....looks interesting..... *head tilt*

shiiiit this is amazing. So smooth!