Jump to content

  • Log In with Google Sign In
  • Create Account
Photo

Codex Suggestion: Species Affiliation

Creator Control

Best Answer Srina Talon, 11 October 2019 - 11:45 PM

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.
Go to the full post »


  • Please log in to reply
42 replies to this topic

#1
Tathra Khaeus

Tathra Khaeus

    𝕎𝔸ℝ'𝕊 ℂ𝕌𝕊𝕋𝕆𝔻𝕀𝔸ℕ

  • Character
    • Character Bio
  • 6,559 posts

​We see that in nearly every form of factory or codex submition, there is an ability to lock it off to solely members of a particular faction. To affiliate your creations solely with one group to allow for creative control with some, monitorable leeway.

 

​Why isn't this same control afforded to the creators of species & planets? Well, for planets this makes sense. They are conquerable and whatnot. But species? Species in terms of variety are as common as weapons, and under certain circumstances it could make sense for a species to be restricted by affiliation. The intent here is to give an additional freedom of choice to codex content creators.

 

​Why? The control should ultimately be in the hands of the creator and, as submissions can be edited this can easily be changed by the creator if they deem it necessary. Of course, whether the restriction of affiliation would make sense comes down to the Codex Judges review of the composition of the submission and intent of the creator. This is intended for use for unique or planetary species mostly.

 

​There is no true foreseeable negative impact from allowing this to become reality, no creative freedom is lost here as anybody can create something in place of what they cannot use initially. There is nothing stopping someone from generating something with their own creative flair using inspiration from someone else's creative content.

 

​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.

 

Thank you for reading.


Edited by Tathra Khaeus, 09 October 2019 - 02:17 AM.

Untitled-1.gif


#2
Valdus Bral

Valdus Bral

    Clan Bral Alor | Muscle Craftsman

  • Writers
    • Character Bio
  • 344 posts

I am an outspoken supporter of this.


ME-MVP.gif

j54xy6F.pngGpWR5Gd.pngskZQANs.png


#3
Vigil Rostu

Vigil Rostu

    G U N F I G H T E R

  • Factory Judge
    • Character Bio
  • 2,292 posts

 

 

Your character profile sheet does not require approval.

No.

 

This rule placement will require for character created people to require approval from someone that is not a staff member to use. This also extends to NPC creations. 


IMMkMdh.png


#4
Tathra Khaeus

Tathra Khaeus

    𝕎𝔸ℝ'𝕊 ℂ𝕌𝕊𝕋𝕆𝔻𝕀𝔸ℕ

  • Character
    • Character Bio
  • 6,559 posts

Vigil Rostu

 

​No, it wouldn't. As the submission would detail this disallowance in it very clearly. When people use others content they typically ask for approval anyway.

 

​Therefore, it would be dealt with in the same broad strokes as breaking the following rule; 

 

- Canon Star Wars Characters are not allowed.

​Or similar to the already existing banned species list. Undoubtedly if someone is using someone's submission to create a character, with this rule in place they know they are doing something they shouldn't be as it would state the creators wishes, in the submission. Thusly it'd be dealt with the same way as someone using factory submissions they are not supposed to be.

 

There is very broad restrictions on character creation already. This wouldn't require increased moderation or change anything regarding character approval as I've made clear above.


Edited by Tathra Khaeus, 09 October 2019 - 02:40 AM.

Untitled-1.gif


#5
Vigil Rostu

Vigil Rostu

    G U N F I G H T E R

  • Factory Judge
    • Character Bio
  • 2,292 posts

Tathra Khaeus,

 

Canon characters are banned because no one person can claim they are playing a character that has since been dead for over 500 years. The other banned species are Celestials, which are quite literally gods, and immortal. mnggal-mnggal are also immortal and can take over a host forcibly. Zillo Beasts were banned because someone played one and decided to play god. Then Bedlam Spirits are literal gods as well. They are banned and restricted for a reason. 

 

Species can be interacted with just as much as a person can RP they are on any planet they wish. If a person from the Sith Empire, really wanted to start a private thread on Kashyyyk and start killing random people in the thread, they can. Just because a faction owns a planet, doesn't mean it cannot be interacted with. 

 

Nor can Canon species be afforded the same treatment. The Golden Company, cannot claim dominion over the Thyrsian population just because their faction is based around them. Does that mean that anyone can make a thyrsian character and be friends with Echani? Yes. It does. Because species are left open for the public to use. Just as planets are. The Nightsister factions cannot claim that they own the species of Dathomirans or Zabraks. Nor can the Echani, Korun, Sith Empire claim the Sith Species, or likewise. Lets stretch it. Nobody can make a Wookie because the SJO has ownership over Kashyyyk. 

 

Its a species that is open to be used as soon as you post it. Just as are planets. Nobody can destroy a planet, nobody can really own a planet due to the Invasion/Dominion/Rebellion rules. Nor can you destroy an entire species, or claim domain over it. 

 

Its my opinion that Species are left open. While it is polite and considered the "Right thing to do" to make some form of communication out to the person who made the species, its not required. Instead of closing everything up, making paperwork for people to punch in with the creator in order to make their character, is what limits creativity. You are free to continue suggesting this, but I am of a different mind. 


IMMkMdh.png


#6
Eternal Cyan

Eternal Cyan
  • Writers
  • 246 posts

I support this suggestion. But, as Vigil Rostu said, I don't think that anyone should be able to claim sole control over a canon Star Wars species. However, I do think that the creator of a species written specifically for Chaos (e.g. Elzeri, Qilin, Draelvasier, etc.) should have the right to control it and dictate how it is used in roleplay. It would be ridiculous for someone to make a Twi'lek faction and starting claiming "rights" over that species, especially since canon species should ideally belong to the community, rather than to a single individual.


Edited by Immortal Cyan, 09 October 2019 - 03:17 AM.


#7
Srina Talon

Srina Talon

    Dread Queen

  • Administrators
    • Character Bio
  • 1,601 posts
This is an interesting perspective. The Codex Team will discuss it further, however, that is not a guarantee that the outcome will be what you wish. Good brainstorming though!

SrinaTalon.gif

Confed1.gifExarch.gif


#8
Tathra Khaeus

Tathra Khaeus

    𝕎𝔸ℝ'𝕊 ℂ𝕌𝕊𝕋𝕆𝔻𝕀𝔸ℕ

  • Character
    • Character Bio
  • 6,559 posts
Vigil Rostu
I was bringing up Canon characters & banned species as to how in technical terms it wouldn't change much.

Also, the examples you're giving are all canon species. Let me be clear this is intended solely for player-created species that are made with this in mind.

I'm not at all suggesting this should be implemented for canon species.

Solely as an option for content creators to have a choice regarding the content they've made.

I respect your opinion but this ultimately is a small change that won't add additional paperwork as people rarely use chaos homebrew species already. This adds no more paperwork than restricted weapons.

All it can accomplish is ease of mind for those who have spent the time painstakingly creating these new species. And in my opinion their ability to moderate the use of their content is no less important nor reasonable than the same rules applied to a lot of factory submissions.

Untitled-1.gif


#9
Adenn Kyramud

Adenn Kyramud

    Buy'ce olar, kar'ta ogir

  • Writers
    • Character Bio
  • 578 posts

I agree with it being for homebrew Chaos species only, would make things more straight forward for custom species IMO.



#10
Valdus Bral

Valdus Bral

    Clan Bral Alor | Muscle Craftsman

  • Writers
    • Character Bio
  • 344 posts

Species submissions such as my Orar'uram are not widespread, they are a species that are not a Canon species, and in Chaos lore they were only made for my clan in a small batch. However, anyone could technically use the species and have as many as they want thereby decimating the lore simply because of website technicalities. No one suggests that Twi'leks or Wookies should have players act as gate keepers, but when a submission is clearly defined as a small population and/or created to be controlled and/or said to follow a specific character or group, then that submission should still be protected just as private technology submissions are in the factory. If someone wants desperately to play or use a custom species they should then ask permission just as it is required to ask permission for technology submissions from other players. This can be handled in much the same way with some modifications:

  • Wide-spread, interplanetary species are for public use.
  • Small population species can be marked as private, thereby requiring permission from the creator before using the submission, otherwise the submission can be used by anyone.

 

 


Edited by Valdus Bral, 09 October 2019 - 05:37 PM.

ME-MVP.gif

j54xy6F.pngGpWR5Gd.pngskZQANs.png


#11
Audren Sykes

Audren Sykes
  • Writers
    • Character Bio
  • 1,277 posts
Might regret piping in here, but I'm going to do it anyways. Quick disclaimer, I haven't yet created a species or planet, nor is doing so on my radar.

With that out of the way, I disagree with locking planets or species down to a single faction. The planet portion has already been stated, they can be conquered as part of the map game. Most species, however, are collections of beings rather than an individual hive mind. Each individual can be assumed to have their own thoughts and opinions, and thus their own loyalties. And as they supposedly have free will, their opinions and loyalties can change. If you look at the EU there are a few examples of very homogeneous species: the Khommites, Chiss, and Yuuzhan Vong spring to mind for me. The Chiss presented a united public face but their ruling families were quite contentious behind the scenes and whenever that's the case they can't accurately say that every Chiss in the whole galaxy is forever loyal to [faction]. The Yuuzhan Vong were loyal to themselves and even then had nearly an entire caste revolt. The Khommites were clones for at least 80 generations with a highly regulated society and yet some fluke made two of them Force-sensitive, and they became Jedi in the New Jedi Order.

Besides, species tend (not always the case but there is a strong tendency) to have a homeworld. If their homeworld is conquered, or if their loyal faction fizzles up and dies, what happens then? The species no longer exists? Or do their loyalties change?

Created species on the other hand, especially those who can only be created by members of a particular faction, I can see being affiliated only with that faction. There's the question of whether their affiliation could change if that of their creator changes, but we can set that aside. These tend to be smaller numbers as Valdus suggested however rather than the world-spanning numbers and non-sentient to boot.

5AhTq0z.png


#12
Tathra Khaeus

Tathra Khaeus

    𝕎𝔸ℝ'𝕊 ℂ𝕌𝕊𝕋𝕆𝔻𝕀𝔸ℕ

  • Character
    • Character Bio
  • 6,559 posts
Thanks for sharing your opinions guys,

I would suggest that the basis of whether something can be restricted by the creator or not shouldn't be placed on if its non-sentient. This is intended for giving the choice of restriction to creators if they wish it and it makes some sense, that can't be regulated simply to non-sentience. Parameters have existed even in the EU for control of sentient production, such as the Clone Army from Kamino.

Additionally, the size of the species shouldn't matter so much as the reasoning behind why the species use should be restricted.

Untitled-1.gif


#13
Judah Lesan

Judah Lesan

    S H A D O W

  • Writers
  • 3,892 posts

Color me interested Tathra Khaeus. Based on this:

 

Generally, in law, a sentient being is one with the faculty of sensation and the power to to perceive, reason and think.

 

Most species created, clones included, would fit this definition. In what situation do you see someone creating a non-sentient species? This would be such a rare thing that perhaps that you might be suggesting a change that for the most part is superfluous? Especially when this would mostly apply to an NPC unit? 
 

Now if the intent is to simply restrict who can and cannot write a particular species then I think this is as unneeded change. For the most part people have in practice asked to be contacted if a person is interested.

 

The addition of the distinction just has me curious. :) 


Ry105PS.png


#14
Tathra Khaeus

Tathra Khaeus

    𝕎𝔸ℝ'𝕊 ℂ𝕌𝕊𝕋𝕆𝔻𝕀𝔸ℕ

  • Character
    • Character Bio
  • 6,559 posts
Judah Lesan

My comment was actually saying non-sentience shouldn't be part of this rule I wish to put in place. And that may be the practice, but this simple addition of a creators choice to restrict use would simplify things for people like me.

And I'm sure there are others with my experience who's whole basis is in codex species that understand that the implimentation of this serves only to benefit those who would choose it. And, doesn't retract from those who wouldn't.

Untitled-1.gif


#15
Judah Lesan

Judah Lesan

    S H A D O W

  • Writers
  • 3,892 posts
I must have had my hairs crossed because I was under the opposite impression. I find it interesting, and yet it also seems about control as well. From a particular view I can understand. However, heaven forbid the creator abandon the board or something happens in live they can longer play the game.

For example I currently write a species which was subbed by a person who isn’t even the person who originally came up with the idea. Were this an option and they chose to lock it, what would have happened when the two primary contacts were gone? One who is never around and one who has had significant LOA’s in the past. Even up to a year or more.

So in this scenario what would be your suggestion for those still invested in the species, or interested in creating said species? Are you thing this to a faction or specifically one writer aka the creator?

Questions I know, but I’m trying to decide whether I like the idea or not?

Tathra Khaeus

Ry105PS.png


#16
Tathra Khaeus

Tathra Khaeus

    𝕎𝔸ℝ'𝕊 ℂ𝕌𝕊𝕋𝕆𝔻𝕀𝔸ℕ

  • Character
    • Character Bio
  • 6,559 posts

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.

 

Also what Restriction is placed on the species would be dependant on what the Creator specified in their submission. I'd assume there would simply be an; Affiliation: -----

 

So that the creator could specify what was required. Those invested in a species should seek out the permission of the writer, and if said writer no longer is available to be contacted. Honestly? Just make your own version. Its the same as factory equipment, just make your own. A creators control of their own creation should always take precedent over somebodies choice to use it.


Untitled-1.gif


#17
Judah Lesan

Judah Lesan

    S H A D O W

  • Writers
  • 3,892 posts
So essentially you’re trying to formalize something that should be an understood courtesy?

Tathra Khaeus

Ry105PS.png


#18
Tathra Khaeus

Tathra Khaeus

    𝕎𝔸ℝ'𝕊 ℂ𝕌𝕊𝕋𝕆𝔻𝕀𝔸ℕ

  • Character
    • Character Bio
  • 6,559 posts

Judah Lesan

 

Essentially? Yes.

 

The luxury given to creators of Factory and most codex productions should be afforded to Species. People who want everyone to use their species can leave it unaffiliated, those who want more control in regards to the use of their Species in roleplay should be afforded the ability to have their wishes supported by the Codex system.

 

Especially when it would be a very easy implementation.


Untitled-1.gif


#19
Captain Jordan

Captain Jordan
  • Writers
  • 425 posts

This seems like unnecessary gatekeeping for character creation. I'm of a mind to agree with Vigil Rostu here, particularly since we as players write sentient species capable of independent thought. Individuals of those species who may act against the norm is a standard consequence of independent thought, so a member of that species not acting exactly as the creator wishes it is not as much of a problem as it's made out to be here.

 

The problems this creates, however, are several. I'd worry how this would be used to control character affiliation, especially since there are no reverse-engineering style rules for the Codex. Characters of this species are now tied to the affiliation specified or can they divorce those ties after creation? What if the faction collapses or the original creator departs Chaos? And if a character made from a Codex species is no longer affiliated with the original stipulations (personal association or faction, etc), are they now defunct? Able to continue writing? And if they can continue writing, are they barred from creating additional characters of that species or inviting fellow players to do the same as their character's relatives/associates (which is a practice that happens often on Chaos)?

 

I trust that our Codex team will consider these implications carefully when approaching a possible implementation here, but I'd much prefer species to remain without affiliation requirements.



#20
Tathra Khaeus

Tathra Khaeus

    𝕎𝔸ℝ'𝕊 ℂ𝕌𝕊𝕋𝕆𝔻𝕀𝔸ℕ

  • Character
    • Character Bio
  • 6,559 posts

Captain Jordan

 

That's fine, must people likely won't choose this option. But for those that want it, they should be able to.

 

This 'gatekeeping' exists for weapons, NPCs. And, not acting as the norm of a species can and can't be a problem, depending on the species and the narrative built around them.

 

Depending on the affiliation, it may not be a faction but simply a writer or company or something that simply requires the approval of the original creator. If said faction collapses? I think what happens there is dependent on the circumstances and the narrative presented by said faction. In the case of leaving the affiliated faction, no - you would not be able to simply divorce ties afterwards as you're entering an agreement to use this persons creation how its supposed to be used. Which is ultimately up to them.

 

And yes, people who have approval wouldn't be able to give it out to others. If a species is created with a specific use in mind, and you wish to use it - you must adhere to those specified rules. Otherwise, make your own.

 

You can't reverse-engineer, you're right. But if you really want to do something similar to what someone else has created, you can just make your own version of it. Its not hard to write up a short and sweet species sub. But if you want to use all the hard work someone else has done for your own, you should have to adhere to their rules if they assign them.

 

You're acting like this will suddenly halt character creation in its steps. Not everyone on here is entitled to use whatever they want, which is clear from the Factories own stipulations. Thusly, nobody is entitled to using whatever homebrew species they want either.

 

This creates no problems for people who wish to use others creations with respect and diligence. Nobody is forcing anything on anyone here, a Chaos species creator should have every right to say No. Just like everything else. Planets are different, they are conquerable - threadable. A thread is a dime a dozen, you wouldn't even notice it. Its a different ballgame for species.


Untitled-1.gif