Remove these ads. Join the Worldbuilders Guild

Go back to the Voting Board

Species relations based not on genetics, but theme

Feature Upgrade · Articles & templates · Created by hdewendt

closed

creature -species creatures subtype creature-type species-type

What functionality is missing? What is unsatisfying with the current situation?

In many fantasy worlds, there are species related by "type", without being genetically related. The current species relations (Parent species) focus entirely on biological relation.

How does this feature request address the current situation?

It's already possible to make a species with a parent species. But they are displayed as "Genetic Ancestor(s)". In many roleplaying systems and other fantasy settings, there are creatures that are "thematically" related - as in, for example, demons or devils and their various subtypes. The idea is not to create a complete parallel system, but to be able to display a "Parent species" as "Parent type". They would be shown as "Creature type" on the subspecies, and "Subtypes" on the parent species page. For example, the Parent type would be "Demon", and the Subtype would be "Balor", in D&D terms.

What are other uses for this feature request?

Aside from living creatures, this could actually be used for a wide variety of things - for example, handling robots similar to species.

The Team's Response

Hello beans! So this reaquest go quite low support. I do understand the reasoning behind it, and I do like the idea of somehow repurposing prompts (this will probably need a request of its own) For what you are trying to achieve though, there are multiple ways to do it, from the humble but very important --KEY::VALUE-- system to the the "tagged" tag that can be used to create and display list of groupings like all creatures tagged as Deamons/Devils/Celestials. Just tag them as such and then use the tagged list on the sidebar. If you want more info of how to use this come by Discord :)

Current score

72/300 Votes · +10660 points

Votes Cast

+300

by Tavernaut
on 2021-11-10 01:06
+50

by Sgòthan Laighe
on 2021-11-07 22:08
+20

by Chrispy_0
on 2021-11-07 20:38
+200

by MachFarcon
on 2021-11-05 22:33
-10

by jfeser
on 2021-11-05 16:28
If this was a generic request to allow us to have a settings panel to re-label fields so non-coders could get the benefits of overriding the labels, I'd vote for it... that would allow the generic case of this which would be great. I don't think a development change of this granularity would improve the system though.
+100

by SusLusus
on 2021-11-05 01:34
+10

by Jontaro
on 2021-11-04 22:23
+300

by Uruschk
on 2021-11-04 13:11
+100

by WitchRobes
on 2021-11-04 12:37
-10

by gregtstevens
on 2021-11-03 21:14
I m downvoting this, but only slightly. I understand the use case, but as others have noted there are multiple ways this can be "hacked". My preferred method is to use custom templates, and to "repurpose" some existing relationship already in the system by just giving it a different text label in the template display. This is only useful advice for people who feel comfortable using the HTML/TWIG editor interface in the "Custom Templates".
+300

by KajetanWrites
on 2021-11-03 14:41
+300

by A Beloved Dimensional Horror
on 2021-11-02 11:59
Would benefit many non-organic living creatures in addition to creatures that were created/spawned as opposed to evolving from a common ancestor
-100

by Verdux Xudrev
on 2021-11-02 11:40
+300

by Argelius
on 2021-11-01 13:11
+300

by NESz
on 2021-11-01 09:27
+300

by turtleoogway
on 2021-11-01 05:15
+300

by Zaigan_Nephria
on 2021-11-01 00:23
+50

by Thin Lizzy
on 2021-10-31 18:58
+20

by Sygrda
on 2021-10-30 15:17
+300

by Nikoyokin
on 2021-10-29 17:32
+50

by SpencerH23
on 2021-10-29 15:05
+300

by incedio7
on 2021-10-29 13:46
+300

by trellowave
on 2021-10-28 21:34
+50

by Sneakyarrow
on 2021-10-28 19:10
-10

by Amancham
on 2021-10-28 18:24
Though I understand the thought process and idea behind this suggestion, I will downvote, because there are ways already to do this, even though they might not be quite as simple as pick an article from a drop down. I am doing something very similar with my creatures right now and will use the content trees to link them. Another way would be the key::value pair (

key

value

) that makes it LOOK exactly like the parent species/type but you can name it whatever you want and you can add the article via mentions. (check out the bbcode infos on the WA Codex, though it is also in bbcode explanation you can open when writing an article.) Downside is, you would have to go to the other article and do the same there, since there is no automatic backlink created. So I get the wish to have it simple, but there are really great alternatives. Obviously there is a lot of support so far, but I still wanted to leave a comment here.
+50

by halduron
on 2021-10-28 10:19
+200

by PhntmDrgn
on 2021-10-28 05:44
+50

by stonebandit
on 2021-10-28 01:30
+200

by JetpackMonkey
on 2021-10-28 00:19
+100

by Wesleybowers
on 2021-10-27 23:11
+100

by 13Emperor37
on 2021-10-27 21:26
+200

by AuraGuard
on 2021-10-27 20:09
+20

by Nyzang
on 2021-10-27 15:25
+300

by Tuisku
on 2021-10-27 10:32
+300

by Rosenweiss
on 2021-10-27 09:44
+300

by Ratha
on 2021-10-27 04:23
+100

by Patchwork Veneficium
on 2021-10-27 04:16
+100

by Djinn
on 2021-10-27 01:02
+200

by UnknownWriter88
on 2021-10-26 22:44
Could be useful. I'll support this
+100

by A Sneaky Kobold
on 2021-10-26 19:51
+20

by Blueparox
on 2021-10-26 16:21
+20

by Adcheryl
on 2021-10-26 14:46
+100

by Chaosmarine125
on 2021-10-26 12:22
+300

by Psychonaut
on 2021-10-26 02:09
+300

by Plasma Ring
on 2021-10-26 00:45
+300

by B_Sylphaen
on 2021-10-25 20:59
+50

by gcjones216
on 2021-10-25 20:35
-10

by A Glamorous Orc
on 2021-10-25 19:20
I recommend the use of Content Trees
+100

by mezzopatricia
on 2021-10-25 16:24
+300

by theaaronw0
on 2021-10-25 16:09
+300

by Sloqush
on 2021-10-25 15:57
+50

by yatenari
on 2021-10-25 15:47
+100

by inkquartz
on 2021-10-25 12:55
+50

by Dunaedine
on 2021-10-25 12:21
+100

by FenDawnchild
on 2021-10-25 09:13
+300

by Nightone
on 2021-10-25 08:49
+50

by DarkNymfa
on 2021-10-25 07:20
+100

by EmperorCharlesII
on 2021-10-25 03:34
+300

by amelianite
on 2021-10-25 02:45
+300

by Dalf32
on 2021-10-25 01:10
+300

by LadyVann
on 2021-10-25 00:29
+300

by Meg B
on 2021-10-24 23:51
+200

by Laria
on 2021-10-24 23:38
+100

by ss2020
on 2021-10-24 20:31
+50

by CristalViper
on 2021-10-24 18:24
+300

by Lunchboxmaster777
on 2021-10-24 17:38
+10

by FizzyBee
on 2021-10-24 16:33
+100

by Lenosallose
on 2021-10-24 15:26
+10

by Vantaj
on 2021-10-24 15:06
-300

by A Wild Unicorn
on 2021-10-24 14:13
+10

by Vixen Windsong
on 2021-10-24 13:04
+10

by melior64
on 2021-10-24 11:08
+300

by hdewendt
on 2021-10-24 09:50

Find your way!

Resources

WHO WE ARE

LEGAL

Get the news

Listen to our Podcast

Our Allies

Species relations based not on genetics, but theme

Species relations based not on genetics, but theme

What functionality is missing? What is unsatisfying with the current situation?

How does this feature request address the current situation?

What are other uses for this feature request?

The Team's Response

72/300 Votes · +10660 points

Votes Cast

+300

+50

+20

+200

-10

+100

+10

+300

+100

-10

+300

+300

-100

+300

+300

+300

+300

+50

+20

+300

+50

+300

+300

+50

-10

+50

+200

+50

+200

+100

+100

+200

+20

+300

+300

+300

+100

+100

+200

+100

+20

+20

+100

+300

+300

+300

+50

-10

+100

+300

+300

+50

+100

+50

+100

+300

+50

+100

+300

+300

+300

+300

+200

+100

+50

+300

+10

+100

+10

-300

+10

+10