Discovery Gaming Community

For the sake of transparency, I was approached by members of the Administration team about my stance on furries, as the storyline department head and lead developer of the development team.

My general take on it is that no, furries (as well as catgirls and other alien species from different sci-fi or fantasy settings) do not and have not existed within Discovery Freelancer as a part of the lore. They are not canon, they do not exist.

One thing to consider is that individual player and player group roleplay coexists interdependently with NPC faction lore. That is, for example, while the Liberty Navy has no lore alliance with the Maquis, each group could roleplay such an alliance if they wished to do so. That would then exist on the forums and in game, without necessarily having to be canon. Other players or groups could possibly ignore it (see FR2). Eventually, as roleplay helps drive the lore, this could potentially be developed into that, taking into consideration a number of minutiae and criteria.

Is that relevant here? Well, yes and no. Just because furries aren't stated to exist, does not strictly mean they don't exist. That's the strongest objective argument for them. Alas, having just argued for them, I shall now state that I don't agree. Why? Even with no explicit denial in lore, there is simply no basis for fox, wolf, or other canine-like human hybrids. The aforementioned example alliance has a basis to occur; it's plausible and the lore might eventually recognize it, whereas fantastical furred humanoids do not.

Counting Outcasts as humans, there are only two other contemporary sentient species known about in Discovery. Those are Nomads (plus infected/hybrid humans) and the Gammu AI. If you're not within one of those three categories, then how did you come about and why? Evil experiments from a shady branch of a secretive research group seems to be the most common scapegoat, which is quite cliche and hardly acceptable from a lore point of view. Additionally, if you didn't consult that faction and get their approval, then it's a form of backhanded powergaming to state that they created you if they themselves didn't know about it or didn't agree to.

Hence, I'm inclined to echo a question on the minds of many: what compels people to choose to roleplay something that does not have a solid, nor reasonable, basis for existence within a setting that really isn't designed for it? Sure, RP flavor is oodles of fun, but this crosses a line.

For those who do, have, or plan to roleplay as one of these creatures, I mean no personal offense. This is just my analysis of the situation, put public for people to see. I'm not even here to debate or discuss the necessity or wording of the new rule.

(04-11-2016, 06:58 AM)SirDoge Wrote: [ -> ]Now, with Toris's permaban, you have lost the best roleplayer around here. Trust me.

I think you're getting a little too worked up about this.

also can you please not go crazy with formatting it's a bit much thanks <3

(04-11-2016, 06:58 AM)SirDoge Wrote: [ -> ]Now, with Toris's permaban, you have lost the best roleplayer around here. Trust me.

I'm not going to sit here and argue about people's RP skills because they were furry, but considering how I've witnessed some pretty OORP things he did ingame, I find your claim laughable

I would love to know why Wisp was denied.

I would also love to know the real reason why Ageira's perk was denied.

You gave us a taste of transparency? We want more.

(04-12-2016, 06:47 PM)Snak3 Wrote: [ -> ]I would love to know why Wisp was denied.

I would also love to know the real reason why Ageira's perk was denied.

You gave us a taste of transparency? We want more.

I'm still waiting for the rest of the Admin Team to post their views on the furry debacle, honestly.

Only about four or five did, and I know what one of them did say so I know a good chunk of the discussion. I, and many others, would like the rest.


More transparency, Admin Team.


I'm with Snak3 on this.

And for the sake of transparency, here's my:

Imo, it is the decision of the faction leaders that were denied to decide whether they want to publish the information they got, or not.

(04-12-2016, 06:55 PM)Jack_Henderson Wrote: [ -> ]Imo, it is the decision of the faction leaders that were denied to decide whether they want to publish the information they got, or not.

In the sake of it all, I want transparency. But to be fair, I also understand the need for privacy. So, I'd like transparency when the involved parties wish.

EDIT:

This is what I get for messing around in the Shoutbox. Jeremy here.