News
Search Options ►Sphinx Update
Rules
Since there's some confusion: The sphinx rule tightening actually isn't a very big change.
Pets with dresses and hair are still fine.
Sphinxes with a human face shape but animal ears and a more cat- or animal-like nose are still fine.
You just can't have a 100% human head pasted on an animal body anymore. Most sphinx designs weren't that extreme anyway, but a few of them were pushing it too far and the rules had to be tightened up. This rule won't actually effect that many pets, and those that it will effect will likely be easily edited to fit within the limit (turn human noses into cat noses, etc).
Also, bare human breasts are still not allowed, as anything that would require an [M] in a topic cannot be on a pet. That part of the news post was not well worded, and unfortunately resulted in some confusion. I'd like to set that straight here.
I'm compiling a more thorough followup post that will explain things in more detail and hopefully alleviate most of your fears. To reiterate: This is not a very big change and won't effect that many pets and sphinx-like pets will still be possible--they just won't be as extreme.
Posted by null
(#543) on Sat Apr 13, 2013 2:03am
- deckland
(#6530)
-
Posted on: Sat Apr 13, 2013 3:47am
I just feel bad for all the people who spent so much GP on sphinx PSDs and such who now will have to put cat noses on things that will look stupid with cat noses.
- Squirrel Teilchen
(#34278)
-
Posted on: Sat Apr 13, 2013 3:49am
Skitty, can you clarify on one rather big thing please... There are SCC species around that are not ok under the new rules. What happens with them? Are the owners seriously not allowed selling psd uses/premades anymore after spending like 80-200 bucks on making them? Also... please to re-consider making it more than 24 hours. By the time your visual guide comes out maybe only 12 hours from the 24 will be left to finish things and it's just overall not enough time.
- Prof JaMEW
(#2712)
-
Posted on: Sat Apr 13, 2013 4:09am
I am too still confused about the nose and ear definite no. Does this mean I cant transplant a human ear on a rats back like this? https://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1945000/images/_1949073_mouse_ear300.jpg you know? Experiments? Mad science? Kind of my metier.
Or a Lepu whose head is just a nose. Nothing else!. I am confused why those are completely disallowed now. Well, yeah they are considered gross by some people. but some people also think Pink is gross ( the colour. not the singer) some people think twoheaded pets are gross. and so on. So why the definate no on noses or ears?
- Kiwi Quiche
(#9493)
-
Posted on: Sat Apr 13, 2013 6:58am
Good, those Sphinx pets were creepy as hell, especially those with boobs. :|
- Revie (Inactive)
(#35743)
-
Posted on: Sat Apr 13, 2013 7:29am
I'm also a tad confused. When it comes to existing pets where do we stand? I have one of Tooki's lovely harpy pets, but I'm hopeless at editing psds myself so will owners get in trouble if they cannot afford to revamp their current pets because they break the new tightening of rules?
- Syleni
(#1883)
-
Posted on: Sat Apr 13, 2013 7:59am
I really really really really really think this should not be retroactive on psds that already passed. On a purely personal level I don't understand _any_ if the arguments against sphynx pets. 'I don't like them' is not a good argument, are many kind of pets people may or may not like. Too human is also pretty laughable considering a huge proportion of players assign their pets the characteristics of an oc and draw them straight up human. All personal feelings aside, however, objectively out is not a fair move in regard to your players when you askew then to buy psd uses in good faith and then effectively invalidate them. Edits are ask wk and good but I paid for thr pas already and I am not prepared to pay again for edits.
- Syleni
(#1883)
-
Posted on: Sat Apr 13, 2013 8:00am
Stupid autocorrect. I hope that's legible. One rain it upsets me is that I am with my son at an allergy clinic for the week. Cell phone only. 24 hour grace period didn't help me.
- singingbadgerLLovesU
(#30385)
-
Posted on: Sat Apr 13, 2013 8:13am
(personally I think a sphinx with a Simii head - or any other "normal" Aywas pet head - would be hilarious...) Sphinxes don't bother me (or any of the other human/animal mythologicals : centaur, faun, dryad, harpy, etc), but the growing preponderance of enormous bosoms - on any and everything, lol - post-Titbird makes me cringe from time to time...I find that far more humanizing than facial features or clothing. And... butt crack? That's gross in REAL life - don't we put our poor little beasties here through enough, lol? (Jamew, I join you in shuddering at the preponderance of pink)
Now, these are all aspects of personal taste, which is going to be different for everyone. I can see vetoing human figures "dressed" as animals, with a minimum of animal features - which I believe was the original intent of the restriction - but animals with, say, 25% or less of human elements adapted to the design are no more "humanoid" than any other fantasy creature, if the elements are homogenous with the rest (animal base) of the design. A review thread specifically for borderline cases in this genre would probably be useful. What about pets holding/using specifically human items? That's equally anomalous, really.
- Rinni
(#40913)
-
Posted on: Sat Apr 13, 2013 11:32am
THis....makes me uncomfortable, not going to lie. : / I'd wanted to do a sphynx type pet....not so sure now. I don't see why noses are such a big issue. : /
Posted on: Sat Apr 13, 2013 3:32am
I think the main problem this rule shift is addressing is the idea of pets vs. people. Pets can be owned and cared for without a great deal of moral quandary, but when a 'pet' approaches the uncanny divide of 'too human' you slide straight from 'fun pet site' to 'fetish site' and even slavery discomfort.
In the end? That wasn't the aim of the admins when they created this site and I'm glad they're addressing this.