Loosening Up Tier 1 Rules

[FlipLaScript]

This was a massive discussion that came up in the oc room that involved like 5 mods and a TON of regulars, but I couldnt get the specifications, just the gist, that tier 1 rules and stuff should be updated to be at least a bit more lax. I'll ping the guys who participated in the discussion on discord for them to come here and say their peace :0

EDIT: The main point of conversation was that narrative justification should not be the main way tier 1 cosmologies are judged, as many cosmologies do not have tier 1 constructs as an essential thing that would collapse the cosmology if removed. Rather, it should be more focused on motives and effort put into the story.

 

[Phoenks]

What exactly is your proposal?

 

[Rayfire]

but I couldnt get the specifications, just the gist, that tier 1 rules and stuff should be updated to be at least a bit more lax.

Main point was that, basically, narrative justification should be less of a factor in favour of focusing more on motives and effort poured into making an actual story. There's extremely few settings that actually need to be tier 1 to work, so it ends up becoming really redundant to have that as a rule. Since, while these sorts of pages should still have a ton of scrutiny put onto them, it's absolutely possible to make something of that scale good quality and not be focused on powerscaling. So with that change we're still keeping the garbage out whilst being more fair to people submitting things that are actually decent

 

[Phoenks]

okay, but there needs to be an actual suggestion of what you want in replacement of the current rule for this thread to be meaningful to the cause.

 

[Rayfire]

okay, but there needs to be an actual suggestion of what you want in replacement of the current rule for this thread to be meaningful to the cause.

I was talking to flip, since he didn't seem to understand what people were worried about

I haven't really thought out this part as much and someone will probably have a better idea than me, but what I'm basically saying is that the narrative justification aspect should be scaled way down to something optional, or at least not the most important consideration. It feels pretty unfair for people who actually put a lot of thought into what they make and clearly isn't just being made for the sake of being broken, but can't get their verse accepted solely because their idea can still work at a lower tier easily. That's my piece

 

[HolderOfKnowledge]

Am I allowed to give my own thoughts and ideas or is just a Flip thing

 

[FlipLaScript]

there needs to be an actual suggestion of what you want in replacement of the current rule for this thread to be meaningful to the cause.

Hm, that's fair

On top of the 6th rule staying (still there but not a primary focus), maybe this one could be something along the lines of

"7: Motives & Effort. The most crucial portion is the motives behind putting a tier 1 structure or scaling into your verse, as well as the effort you put into said structures and the verse as a whole."

Am I allowed to give my own thoughts and ideas or is just a Flip thing

You can absolutely give your thoughts and ideas, I pinged everyone who participated for a reason :]

 

[CCandfriends]

Hm, that's fair

On top of the 6th rule staying (still there but not a primary focus), maybe this one could be something along the lines of

"7: Motives & Effort. The most crucial portion is the motives behind putting a tier 1 structure or scaling into your verse, as well as the effort you put into said structures and the verse as a whole."


You can absolutely give your thoughts and ideas, I pinged everyone who participated for a reason :]

Neat

 

[VeneficaAuthor]

Not every story has ‘proper’ narrative reasoning as our rules currently define, and it’s difficult for authors to justify everything down to the letter when they are scrutinized for everything they may or may not place on their cosmology blog. The rules are also a product of the old staff team, if I remember correctly. They overcorrected as a result of the purge being fresh. Times are different now, so I believe they are due for a change.

I agree with Flip’s proposal, the effort and general quality of a work should be judged moreso than the necessity of including tier 1 concepts. Lots of good main wiki works wouldn’t be able to be indexed on fcoc under our current rules due to lacking sufficient narrative reasoning for their whole structure. Narrative reasoning is useful for keeping out your stereotypical ‘my oc will be the strongest’ powerscalers but having the strongest thing isn’t the intention of everyone who makes a tier 1 series. It should be easy for us to judge the difference between a genuine work with passion and effort put in and the regular rejected slop.

 

[Rayfire]

My thoughts exactly

 

[CCandfriends]

Not every story has ‘proper’ narrative reasoning as our rules currently define, and it’s difficult for authors to justify everything down to the letter when they are scrutinized for everything they may or may not place on their cosmology blog. The rules are also a product of the old staff team, if I remember correctly. They overcorrected as a result of the purge being fresh. Times are different now, so I believe they are due for a change.

I agree with Flip’s proposal, the effort and

general quality of a work should be judged moreso than the necessity of including tier 1 concepts. Lots of good main wiki works wouldn’t be able to be indexed on fcoc under our current rules due to lacking sufficient narrative reasoning for their whole structure. Narrative reasoning is useful for keeping out your stereotypical ‘my oc will be the strongest’ powerscalers but having the strongest thing isn’t the intention of everyone who makes a tier 1 series. It should be easy for us to judge the difference between a genuine work with passion and effort put in and the regular rejected slop.

Amazing answer

 

[HolderOfKnowledge]

Not every story has ‘proper’ narrative reasoning as our rules currently define, and it’s difficult for authors to justify everything down to the letter when they are scrutinized for everything they may or may not place on their cosmology blog. The rules are also a product of the old staff team, if I remember correctly. They overcorrected as a result of the purge being fresh. Times are different now, so I believe they are due for a change.

I agree with Flip’s proposal, the effort and general quality of a work should be judged moreso than the necessity of including tier 1 concepts. Lots of good main wiki works wouldn’t be able to be indexed on fcoc under our current rules due to lacking sufficient narrative reasoning for their whole structure. Narrative reasoning is useful for keeping out your stereotypical ‘my oc will be the strongest’ powerscalers but having the strongest thing isn’t the intention of everyone who makes a tier 1 series. It should be easy for us to judge the difference between a genuine work with passion and effort put in and the regular rejected slop.

Well said! Pretty much my take on the matter