Reworking the Dragon Request Sub-forum

[Jazeki]

I didn't mean to imply that any dragons are robotic/cyborg, but to me, aeons, zyumorphs (and sinomorphs), and xenowyrms are all very futuristic-looking species that seem more at home in a modern setting than a Medieval one. Again, this is my opinion. I was mainly indicating that what counts as "Medieval" and what does't should be further clarified or the restriction be removed entirely. There's nothing inherently wrong with any of these species. It just seems a bit contradictory to continue pushing this restriction when we have had several thoroughly modern-looking species released (and knowing zyus/sinos are a loose reference to Power Rangers, the pyralspites to Homestuck, and the trio dragons to Pokemon) with probably more modern-looking dragons coming down the road. The world that we have been introduced to through the holiday games isn't exactly Medieval, either--it appears as a fantasy hybrid (though this may be something to chalk up to "game mechanics").

 

Essentially, I just think that some of the guidelines need to be revisited or revamped concerning what works for the DC setting and what doesn't.

 

 

Edit to add that the word Medieval relates to a specific time period and setting: "the period of European history from about a.d. 500 to about 1500"

Edited June 8, 2017 by Jazeki

[angelicdragonpuppy]

Celestials have basically the same concept as the Shadow Walkers, and those have been around since 2011--it's been DC canon for a while now. And many ancient civilizations studied the stars, so I don't think it's reaching too much to say that something might have come from up there, especially if someone happened to see a meteorite land.

Y'know, I thought about SWs, but I thought their description made it sound more vague and magic-y while Celestials were more technical. But on looking back you're right, they mention planes of existence too.

 

I guess Valkemarans have been smarter than your average Medieval folks for a long time.

 

Edit: Jazeki, I'm wondering, have you seen things stopped for not being Medieval-y enough? I think robots and things will (and should) be kept out, but a few of the concepts I've seen coming under maybe-not-DC-enough review lately had a lot more to do with not being draconic enough rather than not being Medieval enough.

 

More Edit: I guess what I'm getting at (and what Jazeki said) is that DC feels like a semi-advanced fantasy world rather than a purely Medieval one. Knights and dragons and warlocks, yes, but magic stepping in in place of science so the cultures aren't still stuck dying of horrible plagues and thinking water + dirt = worms, haha. I think in terms of practical application everything that should be getting through is getting through, though, nuances of wording aside.

Edited June 8, 2017 by angelicdragonpuppy

[Jazeki]

 

Edit: Jazeki, I'm wondering, have you seen things stopped for not being Medieval-y enough? I think robots and things will (and should) be kept out, but a few of the concepts I've seen coming under maybe-not-DC-enough review lately had a lot more to do with not being draconic enough rather than not being Medieval enough.

I haven't seen everything that's been stopped. But I think my main issue is that we have concepts that are in DR that aren't dragon-y enough (like the Eldrich one or the Slenderman one [that's still locked since no one picked it up yet]--which is really not Medieval) or others that don't fit DC (like the Draconthrope one), but we don't really have a handle on what DC standards are outside of a few guidelines. Of course, we can't have any more enchanted objects or robots, but as Pie showed in his posts, you can explain even the most modern thing into a Medieval setting and yet we have completed concepts that are coming up for a rework and they don't fit DC.

 

Edit: I think your further edit touched on my point. My point was not that a dragon was or wasn't Medieval, but that we have one seemingly arbitrary guideline.

Edited June 8, 2017 by Jazeki

[Pixxelation]

I didn't mean to imply that any dragons are robotic/cyborg, but to me, aeons, zyumorphs (and sinomorphs), and xenowyrms are all very futuristic-looking species that seem more at home in a modern setting than a Medieval one. Again, this is my opinion.  I was mainly indicating that what counts as "Medieval" and what does't should be further clarified or the restriction be removed entirely. There's nothing inherently wrong with any of these species. It just seems a bit contradictory to continue pushing this restriction when we have had several thoroughly modern-looking species released (and knowing zyus/sinos are a loose reference to Power Rangers, the pyralspites to Homestuck, and the trio dragons to Pokemon)  with probably more modern-looking dragons coming down the road. The world that we have been introduced to through the holiday games isn't exactly Medieval, either--it appears as a fantasy hybrid (though this may be something to chalk up to "game mechanics").

 

Essentially, I just think that some of the guidelines need to be revisited or revamped concerning what works for the DC setting and what doesn't.

 

 

Edit to add that the word Medieval relates to a specific time period and setting:  "the period of European history from about a.d. 500 to about 1500"

I think you're misunderstanding the meaning of that rule. Concepts have to fit into the world of DC--they can't have guns or anything--but they don't have to necessarily look like a c. 1300 painting of a slain dragon. There's design freedom, to a reasonable extent. And as ADP mentioned, there's magic involved, so that gives justification for creating somewhat unnatural-seeming designs.

 

And if you're still bothered, all I can really say is that if you have an issue with them, you don't have to collect them. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯(Also, I'm not really sure how Xenowyrms look futuristic? They look quite the opposite to me--something ancient that's managed to survive and speciate.)

[Pixxelation]

I haven't seen everything that's been stopped.   But I think my main issue is that we have concepts that are in DR that aren't dragon-y enough (like the Eldrich one or the Slenderman one [that's still locked since no one picked it up yet]--which is really not Medieval) or others that don't fit DC (like the Draconthrope one), but we don't really have a handle on what DC standards are outside of a few guidelines. Of course, we can't have any more enchanted objects or robots, but as Pie showed in his posts, you can explain even the most modern thing into a Medieval setting and yet we have completed concepts that are coming up for a rework and they don't fit DC.

 

Edit: I think your further edit touched on my point. My point was not that a dragon was or wasn't Medieval, but that we have one seemingly arbitrary guideline.

The examples you mentioned quite simply do not look like dragons, or just aren't dragons. That's not an issue with setting so much as it is "This is a dragon website. Please make dragons."

 

The setting issue is just a general reminder that your dragon can't have guns or rocket boosters or use an advanced understanding of magnetic fields to protect the planet from solar radiation, as those things wouldn't work in the setting of DC.

Edited June 8, 2017 by PieMaster

[irrelevantindigo]

As much as I appreciate this discussion, I wouldn't mind if someone made it its own thread as it doesn't seem to directly contribute to improving the DR or be suggesting anything. ^^"

[Jazeki]

I think you're misunderstanding the meaning of that rule. Concepts have to fit into the world of DC--they can't have guns or anything--but they don't have to necessarily look like a c. 1300 painting of a slain dragon. There's design freedom, to a reasonable extent. And as ADP mentioned, there's magic involved, so that gives justification for creating somewhat unnatural-seeming designs.

 

And if you're still bothered, all I can really say is that if you have an issue with them, you don't have to collect them. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯(Also, I'm not really sure how Xenowyrms look futuristic? They look quite the opposite to me--something ancient that's managed to survive and speciate.)

I'm not bothered enough not to collect them. I have pages of xenos and counting. I'm just wondering why we have to stick with the Medieval setting (there were guns by the 13th century) and I really mostly want to see more clarification in terms of what exactly makes something fit DC as a dragon-y thing and what doesn't. Red zyus look very T-Rexy and xenos remind me more of sci-fi creatures like the Alien snakes or the things from Tremors.

 

@ii-My main point of posting tied to my request to clarify and update the guidelines from 2016 before the completed list was cleared out.

Edited June 8, 2017 by Jazeki

[Process]

Its not so much the idea or what's it's based on than how the dragon is executed

Dragon with gun = no

Dragon based in gun but still clearly dragon = k

[Jazeki]

Its not so much the idea or what's it's based on than how the dragon is executed

Dragon with gun = no

Dragon based in gun but still clearly dragon = k

I understand this, yes. But I want to know where the "dragon based on x" line is drawn and what makes something "clearly dragon enough for DC." I know of TJ wanting correct proportions, etc., but I think this is where my problem with clarification lies.

Edited June 8, 2017 by Jazeki

[Process]

If you can pull it off go for it?

 

[Pixxelation]

I understand this, yes. But I want to know where the "dragon based on x" line is drawn and what makes something "clearly dragon enough for DC." I know of TJ wanting correct proportions, etc., but I think this is where my problem with clarification lies.

It's subjective and hard to define explicitly, but if it becomes a problem, that's what site artists are in DR to help with. As long as you give it clear draconic features, though, and make sure to make the dragon a dragon with features from x, not x modified to look like a dragon, you should be fine.

[angelicdragonpuppy]

As much as I appreciate this discussion, I wouldn't mind if someone made it its own thread as it doesn't seem to directly contribute to improving the DR or be suggesting anything. ^^"

I think the gist of it is, what's an acceptable concept for DC? Do the guidelines regarding what sort of concepts are acceptable need to be reworked?

 

Personally I think they're alright for the most part--as PieMaster said, they're mainly to keep out dragons based on super modern technology, and they do that job quite well. A lot of the recent issues have just been something not looking draconic enough, which admittedly is a very subjective thing, but I understand the reasoning behind it.

 

That

being

said...

 

I do feel the dracanthropes got the short end of the concepting stick; I'm not sure what the harm would be in submitting both dragon and humanoid sprites and letting TJ pick if he wanted to use the latter. He's not a robot, if he liked part of the concept but not the other, I'm sure a middle ground could have been reached. The conceptor said straight up that he could toss them if he wanted. It just feels preemptive and a pity to toss them out beforehand without even giving them a shot. :C

(Like yes, I can understand the reasoning if a concept has ONLY sprites that are very non-draconic that are being submitted--no point letting a frog with bat wings stapled to it go to the completed list... but as this one did have perfectly nice dragon sprites, I felt it had a leg to stand on in trying something unusual on the side)

 

And PieMaster I understand where Jazeki is coming from, I love Xenos to death and grab Chronos especially like there's no tomorrow, but they look future-y to me too. I tend to picture ancient things as muted colors and worn looking whereas the smooth large interlocking scales + elements + very bright colors on these guys all feel very lively and new and almost biotechy in the mageia and chrono cases. As mentioned though this has only enhanced my love for them :'D

[birdzgoboom]

Sigh I've been reading the discussion but come on. Can we please not with the whole calling Xenos weird sci-fi creatures? If I gave them legs, I'm sure the tune would totally change, but since they're legless and have scales and bright colours they're now weird sci-fi creatures? And their colours are the way they are because they're literally like poster children for whatever mana type they are... *rubs temples*

Ugh... sorry if I sound annoyed, but I kind of am frustrated here, especially since that whole list was literally only dragons that I designed.

Also just because a dragon looks sleek and "modern"(??) doesn't mean it breaks the guidelines. Pie already outlined it well enough in his posts. My dragon concepts do follow the rules for DC dragons and they are actually dragons. If they didn't, they wouldn't be in the cave. So can we leave that at that?

 

Also Jazeki the two topic per person rule has been in the guidelines for literal years, at least before 2012, because that's when I started making Dragon Requests. The information has been available and the rules have been that way for a long time. They are just being re-applied now to old DR topics that used to be Completed since the list got cleared. Nothing has changed, it's just being retroactively applied to things that got punted back into DR recently too, like it should be. But the information has been available to access for a long time.

 

That's my only comment I'm making on that particular part of the discussion-- sorry ii.

 

----

 

My feelings on how things should proceed with DR have been expressed previously in the thread by at least one other person (since I haven't commented in here myself i don't think) and are already in the OP, so I don't think being redundant would be beneficial since the idea's already out there. But rest assured I do think that the way dragon requests and new artists are handled needs changing.

 

I think there are a few interesting ideas outlined in the OP overall, so thank you for providing the thread to bring some ideas together, ii.

[Jazeki]

Birdz, I am not attacking the xenos or your other dragons. I like them and I do not think they are weird sci-fi creatures. I'm just noting that they look and seem more modern than some of the other species.

 

I also know about the two topic thing being in place for years. I was just mentioning that there was an update that could get lost as a sticky on its own and the clearing of the DR caused added work/confusion.

 

The point of my entire comment was not to attack artists or the art, but to glean some sort of clarification on what makes a concept acceptable to DC. As ADP said,

I think the gist of it is, what's an acceptable concept for DC? Do the guidelines regarding what sort of concepts are acceptable need to be reworked?

 

It's easy for an in-cave artist to say "this is subjective and we are here to help." We know we cannot have animal hybrids, enchanted objects, or thoroughly modern things that are not dragons, but there are dragons being released that are less...organic...in feature or appearance than past releases and it can cause a bit of confusion over what works for DC now.

Edited June 8, 2017 by Jazeki

[angelicdragonpuppy]

Ack, Birdz, you misunderstand me! I argue for your creatures, not against them! There's a lot of dragons that look more modern than medieval to me--Celestials, Fire Gems, Wrapping Wings, Soulpeaces, Turpentines, shall I go on? --and many are high on my list of favorites. Obviously their CONCEPTS all work for the cave, I just think their looks are cooler than the average Medieval thoughtless looking lizard dragon. Which is why I argue that D.C. is more "advanced magical society" than "dumb Medieval society." But it is largely only semenatics, as said before I think the guidelines do their job of keeping mechadragons and computerhaxxerdragons out quite well :3

 

So please don't be frustrated? My thinking your breeds look sleek and futurey is not meant as a negative at all. I love Aeons and especially Xenos very much and would be very sad if they weren't in the game. I've worked tediously to make two 5g Chrono x Prize checkers because I love them so; does that sound like a complaint against them? Your breeds often have an aura of magic to them that many others do not. <3

Edited June 8, 2017 by angelicdragonpuppy

[Fiona]

Modern =/= having bright colors nor does medieval == muted colors. Looking "sleek" or not is not a criteria for a request.

 

Those of you arguing that any of the on-site dragons are "modern" based on their bright colors have the wrong end of the stick, in my opinion. As birdz pointed out, Xenos are based on Valkemare's unique magic system. The Zyus are clearly living creatures with a magical summon. Maybe the concept was inspired by a cartoon, but it was created to fit the DC universe.

[TehUltimateMage]

Medieval technology for humans. Doesn't mean that during that period a dragon couldn't have evolved to look bright, round and shiny like a Volkswagen Beetle. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Edited June 8, 2017 by TehUltimateMage

[angelicdragonpuppy]

I think some of us are getting HIT with the wrong end of the stick, here...

 

I love all the breeds mentioned. Look to my scroll as proof.

 

I'm simply saying that D.C. feels like a magically advanced society in knowing about nebulas / meteors / other planes of existence / electricity / turpentine / bacteria (at one point) / etc, more than a durr hurr science is scary medieval society. Again as merely an interesting conceptual debate, for the most part, as I think the guidelines wouldn't differ in practice much even with that clarification.

 

Yet somehow I am saying these dragons I love and fervishly collect are bad sci fi things that don't meet site guidelines?? Wah? Huh?? Please no. I am if anything arguing for allowing for more things like them, not attacking them! :c

 

I feel like a mountain is being made of a mole hill. I like all the mentioned dragons. I like things that look more magic and advanced than mere reptiles. I want to see more like them. That is all. There is no cause for anyone to get upset. <3

Edited June 8, 2017 by angelicdragonpuppy

[Pokemonfan13]

There's also the fact that dragons can communicate with humans, at least based on the holiday events. So maybe the humans wouldn't have figured out the other planes of existence on their own, but a Celestial talked to them and explained it.

Edited June 8, 2017 by Pokemonfan13

[irrelevantindigo]

I would greatly appreciate if this got it's own thread, sorry. :T

 

edited because typo.

Edited June 8, 2017 by irrelevantindigo

[angelicdragonpuppy]

I would greatly appreciate if this got it's own thread, sorry. :T

 

edited because typo.

Err, sorry Dingo ^^;

 

To get back to the crux of the matter, my question is:

If a mod thinks a concept won't be approved by TJ, will they still accept it?

 

 

[irrelevantindigo]

Err, sorry Dingo ^^;

 

To get back to the crux of the matter, my question is:

If a mod thinks a concept won't be approved by TJ, will they still accept it?

It's ii. Dingos are wild dogs. ^^"

 

Likely not. But they probably will use the best of their judgement and discuss with their peers. So it likely wouldn't be an issue.

This could also be solved if more communication with TJ was had over what is and isn't fit for DC.

 

[Process]

Ok so

Overall concepts need to fit tjs standards

 

Artists kinda have worked with him more and have a better general idea what is liked and what isnt. What fits with lore and what doesn't (srsly birdz probably knows the most about lore)

 

So artists comming into a thread to try and push it in a certain direction is based off of a lot of trail and error from our end. We want concepts to suceed and not fall into traps we've been in ourselves.

 

Also I find dc to be more dnd fantasy madness than strait medevial

[angelicdragonpuppy]

Ok so

Overall concepts need to fit tjs standards

 

Artists kinda have worked with him more and have a better general idea what is liked and what isnt. What fits with lore and what doesn't (srsly birdz probably knows the most about lore)

 

So artists comming into a thread to try and push it in a certain direction is based off of a lot of trail and error from our end. We want concepts to suceed and not fall into traps we've been in ourselves.

 

Also I find dc to be more dnd fantasy madness than strait medevial

Oh, I understand why artists are coming in to give guidance--a lot of things just got pushed back to DR from ye olden days when standards were looser. I'm just wondering if, going forward, mods will try to get these concepts changed before they even approve them, or if they're going to follow the old policy of just setting them loose and seeing where they wind up. :3

 

And !!! Yah that's what I was getting at, that DND feel. It's not advanced like computers and cars advanced, but at the same time it feels a lot more intelligent than an actual medieval setting, allowing more creativity and scientifically fleshed out concepts.

 

@ii: oh... oh man... I've been reading your name wrong for a long time it seems x'D

 

 

[Fuzzbucket]

And PieMaster I understand where Jazeki is coming from, I love Xenos to death and grab Chronos especially like there's no tomorrow, but they look future-y to me too. I tend to picture ancient things as muted colors and worn looking whereas the smooth large interlocking scales + elements + very bright colors on these guys all feel very lively and new

I have to point out that very VERY many mediaeval (if you are using the 1300-1500 thing, which someone did) are VERY colourful indeed. Travel in Europe, where a lot of old buildings have been restored to their original colouring and it is positively dazzling - it sometimes hurts your eyes when you look at them; also look at paintings from the period. We do not have the monopoly on colour. (And I have no doubt that earlier periods were much the same.) AS Fi has pointed out without mentioning this context.

 

Just saying...