---

[Shadeleaf 1022]

Bryophytes, Trolls, and Imp Parasites are no longer playable creatures

[mmat 7460]

YES

[Gone 869]

2 minutes ago, ¤Arzota¤ said:

With the removal of these creatures, comes the possibility for more playable creatures to be accepted and implemented into Rp.

 

I'd like an explanation behind this thought process. How does removing anything affect the chances of new lore being accepted?

[Sky 0]

What's the logic in "If we remove this, we can accept this!" ? We are a continually expansive world, there shouldn't be a limit to the creatures rolling about. Just because they are 'playable' by the players, doesn't mean they don't inhabit this world without a player behind a screen controlling them. There's literally no point in this.

[Ford 1996]

Good idea. Very nice.

[Nug 2011]

what is the point 

[luv 3469]

Bryophytes...

[Shadeleaf 1022]

7 minutes ago, Tiliena said:

 

I'd like an explanation behind this thought process. How does removing anything affect the chances of new lore being accepted?

 

6 minutes ago, ˢᵏʸ said:

What's the logic in "If we remove this, we can accept this!" ? We are a continually expansive world, there shouldn't be a limit to the creatures rolling about. Just because they are 'playable' by the players, doesn't mean they don't inhabit this world without a player behind a screen controlling them. There's literally no point in this.

 

A big reason why new lore may or may not be denied or accepted is the ability of other lore to 'basically do the same thing'. We've just gotten rid of big trolls, magical elemental parasite creatures, and demon parasite creature 'things', and your everyday blob. This opens up a big category of stuff new lore can fill in and expand upon. Perhaps it wasn't the best phrasing, apologies.

 

 

[Ford 1996]

lets be honest bryophytes were always pretty **** 

[Space 2335]

3 minutes ago, ¤Arzota¤ said:

 

 

A big reason why new lore may or may not be denied or accepted is the ability of other lore to 'basically do the same thing'. We've just gotten rid of big trolls, magical elemental parasite creatures, and demon parasite creature 'things', and your everyday blob. This opens up a big category of stuff new lore can fill in and expand upon. Perhaps it wasn't the best phrasing, apologies.

 

 

 

Why? If you are going to remove lore that does basically the same thing as some new lore, and then accept the basically the same lore thing, you end up with BASICALLY THE SAME LORE MAKING THE REMOVAL POINTLES ARE WE IN CRAZY LAND WHAT THE **** AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH

[AlternateKy 89]

This is so unfortunate... Trolls were just starting to become more popular. Three /accepted/ applications within one week, darn. I had so much planned for my Troll. R.I.P Urgrum

[H 820]

9 minutes ago, ¤Arzota¤ said:

 

 

A big reason why new lore may or may not be denied or accepted is the ability of other lore to 'basically do the same thing'. We've just gotten rid of big trolls, magical elemental parasite creatures, and demon parasite creature 'things', and your everyday blob. This opens up a big category of stuff new lore can fill in and expand upon. Perhaps it wasn't the best phrasing, apologies.

 

 

 

Wait, if you're removing lore so that you can add lore that does the same thing, what was the point of the removal in the first place? And if there are other characteristics of the new lore that could stand on their own, wouldn't they be accepted anyway?

[Mrlollytime 102]

throws away bryophyte app, finished skin and goes to change the rp built up to it....... 

[Monomakhos 1849]

death to bryophytes

[Stag 3231]

I would urge the team to not be opposed to the return of these groups in the future. Especially with trolls as they are a staple. 

 

If a group of players come to you and say "we would like to play these creatures that aren't currently on the server but have been" the team should be lax about it. That's just my opinion.

 

The other ones were both decent ideas but neither were fully realized in my opinion.