Codex Suggestion: Species Affiliation

[Judah Lesan]

Well, if you're currently writing it, I'd assume you already had permission from the writer. This could be used to bypass their hypothetical lock in the future unless they stated otherwise I assume.

Yes and no. I was writing the species before I came to chaos because as I stated it is not the intellectual property of the poster. The original developer doesn’t write on chaos. As such I would have never sought permission, just port the characters over and write them. Just for transparency sake in my example.

***

Also... I do understand wanting factory rules and courtesies to apply to species and planets, however, as the above poster has mentioned I think this might cause more problems than it will solve. The templates provide the opportunity to list out the parameters in what the species is supposed to be... forcing a certain affiliation beyond that is then infringing in some part on what it means to be sentient.

Unless you are creating a species that lacks the ability to reason and make choices, as the creator, you are going to have to give up some control to those who create a character with that species. If that is unacceptable, the codex is optional unless the species is a mix of three or more unique dna or species sets. In fact, taking a rule about ships and weapons, inanimate and non-sentient objects, is really comparing apples to kumquats to begin with I think.

Good thoughts... see where you’re coming from... unsure if I think it needs to be a change.

[member="Tathra Khaeus"]

 

[Tathra Khaeus]

[member="Judah Lesan"]

Well for starters this is just for codex species, not planets.

I understand what you're saying, and for people that feel that way they don't have to associate with this stuff. Its entirely optional.

Not everything is for everyone. This simply turns around the idea that you need to give up something to that person who is using your species as that makes it optional for the creator, and in turn means they have to give up something too as it was intended for a specific purpose.

It doesn't infringe on anything regarding sentience when the species is designed for something specific. Not everything is about having the most choices.

A couple of choices among hundreds taken away isn't that big of a deal.

 

[ToKola Bakari]

I agree, completely.

 

[Cay-Yo]

I think this request makes some sense. Especially since the same is already a thing with one type of player character - droids. They are sentient player species that, if not canon, need applications to be played (in the factory). Choosing Unique or Close-Market with a faction affiliation already provides such restrictions not found in organic species on the Codex portion of the site. If it hasn't caused the RP to be affected adversely there I don't see how it would be here.

Though any sort of creator created locks on planets would be a no vote on my end. Planets are too much of a community thing (I know this was already addressed).

 

[Alixandra Ishtar]

I don't often delve into discussions much, but I agree with Tathra where it concerns Chaos Made Species. I mean, how big of a deal is it, if someone creates something and determines they wish to affiliate it with a faction or group? Are there really that many people using Chaos Homebrew species that this change would drastically affect them?

Like, this is not some great ethics debate about what makes one sentient or non-sentient. This is a collaborative writing site, where people can create and introduce their own content that they have worked hard to create. It's not like Tathra is advocating that canon species lose their free will. Or that you, as a writer no longer have free will.

Honestly, even if someone created something and listed an affiliation for it, and say I wanted to write that species outside of said faction/group/whatever, all I would have to do is speak with the creator and propose my idea to them. If they are cool with it, then they can give the OK to do so. But if not, then I just move on to my next idea either with that species or find another species more suited to my original idea. It's not long species are in short supply...


It's a bit rich to claim that someone has to give up control of a species that they put hard work into making, just because they submit it into the Codex to give it some legitimacy and then some random Tom, Rich, or Harry decides they want to use it. How does it hurt anyone, right now, if this was to be enforced?
At what point does someone's ownership of their own work get superseded by someone who just wants to use someone else's work?

 

[Ellie Mors]

If the species isn't grown in a lab and more or less mind controlled or not intelligent enough to make their own decisions (non-sentient), what is the logic in telling a writer that their character must always belong to a particular faction or group?

Especially when that faction will no longer exist in the next year or two or five?

It's a bit rich to claim that someone has to give up control of a species that they put hard work into making, just because they submit it into the Codex to give it some legitimacy

Yes, because there is no legitimacy in the codex. You are not being given a star to put on your hat/shirt/whatever that says "Staff says this sub is ok, don't report me". It is a place to submit ideas that have been worked out enough to be written down for referencing. What is being advocated here is to go a step further and tell any writer who makes a character belonging to that species that they have to write a certain way, belong to a certain group, etc.

Sorry, but that doesn't jive with the entire basis of this website.

 

[Tathra Khaeus]

[member="Braith Achlys"]

It is a step further. But its not forcing this on anyone. Writers can easily choose a different species.

This is something the writer would be agreeing to in the first place if they decided to. The entire basis of this website categorises the majority of its creations in the factory or codex as able to be restricted in terms of use.

Chaos writers aren't entitled to every species or shouldn't be. And in regards to the sentience thing?

Its only something you'd choose to lose slighlty. Just because the writer doesn't have 100% control doesn't mean ICly their character is suddenly non-sentient.

Not every choice is avaliable to everyone. That's just realism. And if you don't want to he part of a particular species in-universe realism then you don't have to.

Just do something else.

 

[Grrwunhoooll Agaburry]

All this ruling would be intended to do is to put some control into the hands of a codex submitter who designs a species with this in mind. This can only serve to save from potential headaches and misuse of content.

What would be considered a misuse of content to you and how would you determine this?

We all have different viewpoints and perspectives. Why should anyone have to "choose". "adhere", "accept" or be "forced" to share your own for the sake of what you might consider a "misuse" or "potential headache"?

Not every choice is available to everyone. That's just realism. And if you don't want to he part of a particular species in-universe realism then you don't have to. Just do something else.

What do you consider in species in-universe realism being? And what does that mean?

You may see it as one thing and someone else may see it the opposite. Why should other writers be forced to conform to you, me or anyone else with a custom species to write them and if they dont accept to these terms and conditions then they can move on and try their luck with another species? Huh?

Sounds like a Writer screening or job interview in a sense. Thats not very fun and wouldn't give me a very nice feeling. To know if I might or could be approved or not based off the singular viewpoint of another and also be held to it as well. Thats what could and is implied here and this is different from the factory as I am under the impression that the factory staff do in fact coordinate with one another and exchange thoughts on subs. Same goes for the codex id assume. A team. In this specific instance the species creator would then be placed in a similar position and be alone at that. Do you see what i am pointing at here? Its all subjective now.

Just because a foreign idea or um play-style if you will... or i guess writing style in this case is used does not mean its negative or detrimental. A beautiful thing about Chaos is all the different perspectives and melting pot of ideas that it has. None of them ought to be considered lesser or superior its a spectrum that shows individuality and personal uniqueness. Change is not to be feared.

You bring up that a writer can just move on if they dont adhere to this "species in-universe realism" How is this not some-type of ultimatum?

 

[Tathra Khaeus]

[member="Darth Immortuos"]

Misuse of content? Like making a Decepticon that transforms into a telly-tubby in a serious story. That's a misuse of the content that originated from the transformer creator.

What my personal beliefs on misuse are or could be defined on depends on the subject. But, that analogy above is kind of a broad stroke. And to answer your question as why anyone should have to adhere to someone else's viewpoints or perspectives is because they want to use that other persons content. Its not forcing them to do anything, there's plenty go round.

In-universe realism is like, for example if you tried to put a super soldier in Breaking Bad? Sure, everybody is able to do what they want. Some things just don't fit, and in the case of specifically designed creations that are intended for use within a certain context - that in-universe realism is important to the integrity of the quality of that content.

Other writers can move onto other things because they didn't put in the work to make the thing they want, someone else did. Its not so different in regards to the Factory as someone who submits something alone has the right to decide who and how it can be used. Outside of a faction, within one; ect. Factory creators that make weapons can sell to people they want to, and not sell to people they don't want to. Its always been subjective.

And you're right, change and innovation aren't bad. Just because its different doesn't make it detrimental. But, it should ultimately be up to the person who created it in the first place if it is. Not everything can work within a particular context, it doesn't make it inferior or superior. Sometimes things are just incompatible and that's not a bad thing.

It is an ultimatum, but at least its a discussion. And, honestly the entitlement should be afforded to the Creator not someone wanting to use it.

 

[Ellie Mors]

The entire basis of this website categorises the majority of its creations in the factory or codex as able to be restricted in terms of use.

No, the restriction of stuff in the factory is to provide balance to the submission, not to disallow other people to use said things. If someone does a thread where they obtain said items, it is theirs. The Affiliation is there to go with the production of the item so the factory and the writer submitting them are completely clear about how many people will be using the submission. Balance in terms of distribution is much more important in the factory than it is in the codex, where you have armor made of beskar that has "extreme" resistances to things like lightsabers and blasters, or gigantic starships. Affiliation is also there because we have rules which restrict certain types of submissions to major factions or individuals, which means it needs to be provided so it is clear who it is that will be using it.

Those submissions are also not people's characters.

Chaos writers aren't entitled to every species or shouldn't be.

That is your opinion and I would disagree, as would the current format of the rules as they both explicitly state that characters do not need approval and the fact that there is, in fact, no part of the codex that restricts who can use which species (prior to this suggestion). If the site were to adopt these suggestions, that would certainly make your statement true, but it is currently objectively false as stated. To add this suggestion would completely alter the way this website is ran - we have had people request and suggest rules to police character bios more than the few rules that ban specific species or characters, and all of them have been turned away because they would go against the spirit of this website, which is to be able to join the website and make a character and immediately start roleplaying without needing the approval of an admin, RPJ, and especially not other writers. I don't trust an admin to be unbiased in the approval of a character bio, and I certainly will not trust a writer that isn't beholden to any standards of conduct to provide a better assessment than them.

 

[Tathra Khaeus]

[member="Braith Achlys"]

That's entirely fair, you don't have to trust anybody for the approval of your biography, 99/100 times you wouldn't have to. When said writer isn't using someone else's content. And again, if somebody is opening somebody elses content and it blatantly states that this rule has been implemented for said species, then its nobodies choice but that Writers to submit to some form of approval process.

However, it wouldn't completely alter anything as I just stated it is simply another choice, one anybody new or old would understand by just reading the submission. It is my opinion, and its entirely fair for my opinion to affect my content. It doesn't have to affect anyone who doesn't hold that opinion.

Also, rules aside it has been an unstated social rule to seek the approval of a content creator to use their stuff for as long as I can remember. Formalising that won't hurt anybody except for those who want to use something in a way it shouldn't be in the first place.

This isn't policing anything as, to know if you like a species; you have to look at the Codex submission. And thusly, somebody would see that this rule exists. So, seeing as people typically don't go out of their way to break the rules? Policing of bios would be highly unnecessary.

 

[Vora Kaar]

that in-universe realism is important to the integrity of the quality of that content.

Then why did you come to chaos making your own species when you could have done the exact same thing with the Yuuzhan Vong? this site, IN ITS ENTIRETY, did not get approval from Lucasarts/George Lucas, or Disney to be made and used. It uses pretty much everything from canon, Legends Extended Universe, and more to create the website we currently have.

We create rules on the site to create an "even ground" or a "fairness" for all who are on the site. Its fair, for companies to be able to hold onto their material items. Its also fair for writers on the site to write whatever they want, how ever they want, with who ever they want, with whatever species they want. That is fairness.

Go to any other site you find, and search the terms and conditions. Try to find other sites that do not have the clause of "Any material created upon the site is owned by the site." This one singular clause means that anything you make on that site, is not owned by you, but by the site itself. That site would own everything you ever wrote down. Chaos does not do that. Because its "Fair" to the creators and those who use it.

its fair that a ruling done by a team of people with a consensus to deny the right for people to use peoples technology. It not fair for one singular person who is biased and has no "checks and balances" to be able to afford the same decision making process on a species they made.

Your ultimatum could also be said for you as well. If you don't like how the site runs, if you don't like how things are being handled, then why don't you move on? Throwing out that singular sentence causes so much hate, and salt. It is a "My way or the Highway" effect that Tefka, the site owner, was trying to avoid when making the site. That is why there are so many open rules like. Characters not needing approval. Writing whatever species you want. Those are left open because when the site was first made, it was trying to avoid the mistakes that many other sites have created which was in fact, the ultimatum of "My way, or the highway." which you feel like implementing with species.

Sites have fallen, entire communities have fallen from that one sentence alone. Bringing it to the table, only hurts your cause.

 

[Srina Talon]

I've read fully through this suggestion and the subsequent discussion. Good points were made on both sides. I appreciate the ideas and feedback regardless of the outcome.

Let me start off by saying that I can see why this change could hold appeal for some writers. Planet and Species submissions are some of the most creative, exciting, and potentially time-consuming works that a member of the community can choose to undertake. They become near and dear to the original creators so the thought of "misuse" or "misinterpretation" does indeed strike a chord.

All that being said—This is not a change that the Codex will be adopting at this time. Restrictions are necessary from time to time, but in this instance, I do not believe that it would benefit the overall community.

 

[Alixandra Ishtar]

Go to any other site you find, and search the terms and conditions. Try to find other sites that do not have the clause of "Any material created upon the site is owned by the site." This one singular clause means that anything you make on that site, is not owned by you, but by the site itself. That site would own everything you ever wrote down. Chaos does not do that. Because its "Fair" to the creators and those who use it.

Except by stating that everything is a free for all and that anyone can pick any random homebrew species, and the creator has 0 input or ability to prevent something they created from being misused, you are saying that anything placed on Chaos is owned by Chaos. What incentive is there for someone to want to submit their hard work as a creator, when the moment it hits the Codex, it really is essentially no longer possible for that creator to go "well, given that this species has a symbiotic relationship with the light, that means they couldn't feasibly be a darksider" only for someone wanting to use it to go "well too bad, Chaos permits me to use any species I want however I want, and you can't do anything about it".

Like, how is that fair to the creator of that piece of work? How is that the site not owning that person's work? Or perhaps that's why you so aptly placed the word fair in quotation marks, because it's not really fair to creators.

What specifically about allowing some content creators to limit the use of their creations (while I suspect a vast majority will not), is going to suddenly destroy Chaos?
You say it's fair for a group of people to deny access to technology, but that one person (who literally put their time and effort into making something) cannot deny access to the use of their species. Yet there are many unique weapons and pieces of technology that do not belong to groups of people but a single person. For example, the Crossbow pistol that I submitted, it would not be difficult to produce more of them and for other people to make one. Yet, as an individual content creator, I hold the right to deny it's use to anyone else because that is part of the Factory system.

At most, you are looking at a half dozen to a dozen custom made species no longer being quite as available as they once were. It does not make them off limits, it just means that instead of me being able to make a wolf person and siding them with the jedi, I may just have to side them with the sith to write that species because it's part of the lore. Or I could look a bit further in the Codex and found any number of other wolf people without that particular limitation.


It begs the question: How many people within this discussion are exactly using a Custom created species that they are concerned this would stop them from using?
And again, at what point does someone's ownership of their own work get superseded by someone who just wants to use someone else's work?


I understand the Codex team has decided against adopting the same protections afford to content creators in the Factory. But I'm curious if I'll get any answers to questions I've posed about actual real people's rights, when people have been so up in arms and arguing that it infringes upon what it means for an entirely non-existent beings sentience and rights. But if the admins prefer not to allow this discussion to go on, by all means.

 

[Tathra Khaeus]

Then why did you come to chaos making your own species when you could have done the exact same thing with the Yuuzhan Vong? this site, IN ITS ENTIRETY, did not get approval from Lucasarts/George Lucas, or Disney to be made and used. It uses pretty much everything from canon, Legends Extended Universe, and more to create the website we currently have.

​Because I don't like the Vong. I don't see how that's relevant to what I'm saying as the in-universe realism of something is dictated by the person who created it. Like for example how, if I make a sawed-off shotgun that shoots once but someone uses it semi-automatic. That's breaking its in-universe realism. What Lucasarts or anyone else thinks doesn't matter.

We create rules on the site to create an "even ground" or a "fairness" for all who are on the site. Its fair, for companies to be able to hold onto their material items. Its also fair for writers on the site to write whatever they want, how ever they want, with who ever they want, with whatever species they want. That is fairness.

Go to any other site you find, and search the terms and conditions. Try to find other sites that do not have the clause of "Any material created upon the site is owned by the site." This one singular clause means that anything you make on that site, is not owned by you, but by the site itself. That site would own everything you ever wrote down. Chaos does not do that. Because its "Fair" to the creators and those who use it.

its fair that a ruling done by a team of people with a consensus to deny the right for people to use peoples technology. It not fair for one singular person who is biased and has no "checks and balances" to be able to afford the same decision making process on a species they made.

​What's fair and what isn't fair is subjective. And in my opinion when I make something my idea of 'fair' takes precedence over somebody who didn't make it. Somebody could say its not fair that a Katana made for the Sith isn't available to the Jedi faction, but whoever made the Katana choose to not have it available to anyone outside of that. That's their version of fair.

​Of course, this species thing is a more extensive oversight. But, if somebody wants to join in on that its their choice. Having a few select codex submitted species be locked off isn't gonna ruin the website and certainly shouldn't annoy anybody. People can write whatever they want regardless of what I say no to as they can just make their own version of it with our very useful codex templates.

Your ultimatum could also be said for you as well. If you don't like how the site runs, if you don't like how things are being handled, then why don't you move on? Throwing out that singular sentence causes so much hate, and salt. It is a "My way or the Highway" effect that Tefka, the site owner, was trying to avoid when making the site. That is why there are so many open rules like. Characters not needing approval. Writing whatever species you want. Those are left open because when the site was first made, it was trying to avoid the mistakes that many other sites have created which was in fact, the ultimatum of "My way, or the highway." which you feel like implementing with species.

Sites have fallen, entire communities have fallen from that one sentence alone. Bringing it to the table, only hurts your cause.

​​A site and a species might both be types of platforms for roleplay but they aren't the same thing. Sure, people could say move on. But, I can deal with my ideas not meshing with others. I'm okay that this doesn't pass, being told no happens. Same thing goes for species, not everything can work in the same box. It shouldn't. That's just lazy.

​Some ideas need their own box, that's just how it is for me.

 

[Grrwunhoooll Agaburry]

 

[Judah Lesan]

​
not everything can work in the same box. It shouldn't. That's just lazy.

​Some ideas need their own box, that's just how it is for me.

Which is the main issue here more than anything else. If you’re creating something that doesn’t fit in the overall sandbox which requires this much control to pull off, one would wonder why even make it?

Yet you’ve applied for Major Faction status, so I am assuming you want your ideas to work in this sandbox and benefit it in some way?

 

[Kurayami Bloodborn]

You want to control how a species is written to make sure it conforms to your own subjective standards. Nah.The moment you submit anything to the site, you no longer retain full creative rights. As Virgil stated when discussing the terms and conditions of this site and most every site of its ilk i have seen in my time bouncing around. It is standard and if you were unaware of this caveat then I would suggest reading the terms of use again. It is clearly stated.

I do understand your want to have control, but that isn't how this is setup, and it shouldn't be. If something can think on its own then it is possible that it wouldn't adhere to the minutiae of what you envisioned at the start. That is the beauty of a community of writers, organic evolution of such things. Perhaps it was believed they coulld only survive on whatever planet, but one questioning mind decided to test that. After returning and telling of their adventures, others would likely want to see for themselves what lies in the vastness of space. Or a group don't like the fact that their species is allied to whatever faction and rebel. Those are two things that just popped into my head while thinking this over and writing this response.

Your idea would quash any possibility of these types of storylines unless you specifically approved them, and that isn't in the spirit of Chaos. The other common argument I've seen since the start of this thread, is that technology CAN be limited in such a way. True, to an extent. You see a Unique piece of tech you like in the factory? Cool make a derivative, with or without permission there is nothing stopping you from doing that.

My personal take though? Work with others. COLLABORATE. Like the site was built to foster. Don't like how someone writes a species you created, PM them and talk it out like a kriffing adult. Your solution is puerile at best and kills the possibility of great storytelling at worst.

That's all I have to say, so tag me if you want, just don't expect a response.

 

[Tathra Khaeus]

[member="Judah Lesan"]

Not fitting in a universes sandbox isn't the same thing as being so tonally/narratively flexible that anything can happen in it.

Darth Vader and the Jabba Palace song exist in the same universe but have seperate sandboxes for a reason. Darth Vader shouldn't be dancing to the Jabba Palace song, regardless of who might've thought it was a good idea.

Some ideas are just wrong.

[member="Kurayami Bloodborn"]
Don't expect everyone on here to act like adults.

 

[Grrwunhoooll Agaburry]