Species Guidelines

This document covers the policy for the acceptance and maintenance of proposed playable roundstart species on Wizard’s Den servers. This document exists as both the direct rules and a further set of soft principles for proposing, developing and maintaining roundstart species for Space Station 14.

Why These Guidelines Exist

Selection of species is the first and most important decision a player will make at character creation. Space Station 14 is a game that encourages emotional connection and roleplaying, and this means that, once a character is created, it is very challenging for maintainers to “un-make” that character by removing the species from the game, or even significantly altering that species, should its design be found wanting. As such, species must be held at a high standard to be accepted.

In addition, species are a key aspect of the game’s themes and setting. A level of consistency is required to ensure that the world remains immersive and engaging for all players.

Finally, species are often the cause of lengthy debates, especially for new species proposals. This policy document exists to guide discussion of species and ensure that this time can be better spent.

The Golden Rule

Wizard’s Den maintainers always have the final say on the content that they do or do not want on upstream. Everything in this document can be overruled by maintainer consent.

If Wizard’s Den declines to accept a new species, this should not be considered a snub of the species concept as a whole. The objective of Wizard’s Den is to provide a ‘vanilla’ codebase for Space Station 14 servers run by many other groups, as well as providing a fun experience for players on the Wizard’s Den servers specifically. Because of Wizard’s Den’s role as an upstream, it can’t usually accept content as easily as many downstreams can. Likewise, because Wizard’s Den is considered a ‘vanilla’ variant of Space Station 14, there are many great potential concepts for a species that are too unusual or specific to one way Space Station 14 is played (such as on high role-play servers, highly chaotic or comedic servers, and so on) to be suitable for Wizard’s Den specifically.

Porting from SS13 and SS14 downstreams

From time-to-time, a species with significant popularity either on notable Space Station 13 servers or Space Station 14 downstreams may become in-demand for players on Wizard’s Den.

Being a popular species does not grant an automatic right to being upstreamed to Wizard’s Den. That said, popular species often gain momentum behind them that can iterate, sometimes repeatedly, until a good proposal is found.

All species must be considered fairly and equally for proposal, implementation and maintenance. Provenance is not a replacement for quality.

Rules Summary

1. A species must have a distinct identity that is notably different in theme from the other species available on Wizard’s Den.
2. A species must represent new or substantially remixed design ideas.
3. A species must be, at least conceptually, reasonably balanced with the other species available on Wizard’s Den.
4. A species design that directly encourages speciesism or other rule-breaking will be rejected.
5. A species must not be “deliberately” bad or unusually challenging to play.
6. A species must not represent a new challenge to moderation and adminning.
7. A species must be technically feasible to implement and maintain.
8. A species must not entirely circumvent one or more common gameplay elements of Space Station 14 without a suitable replacement.
9. A species must not be designed with a specific, critical flaw that, without that flaw, would make the species overpowered compared to other species.
10. A species must not cause accessibility problems for players (e.g. those that are hard-of-sight, hard-of-hearing, or sensitive to certain visual effects).

Rules Details

Rule 1: A Distinct Identity

Space Station 14 is a game about weird chaos on a weird space station. Specifically, it is a game themed to sci-fi and (some) fantasy tropes, with a focus on fulfiling a serious-yet-silly tone.

Species must be thematically and visually distinct from other species. It should be possible, via audio cues and examination of their sprite, to determine what species someone is, especially if that species has important combat abilities to consider.

If a species does not have a strong-enough distinction from another species, this is grounds for rejection. For example, a ‘sharkperson’ species with a big tail and a love of eating meat may be considered too similar in concept to a lizardperson.

At time of proposal, concept art, references and demonstrations are welcome to help illustrate this identity. If this species is played on downstreams or SS13 servers, showcasing their identity via a video, slideshow, images and other methods are also welcome.

Remember that the most invested person in a character or creature design is always the creator. It is always on the proposer of a species to prove why a species is sufficiently interesting to be a candidate for upstream.

Species may be inspired by, and follow design cues from, external IP and inspirations. However, in these cases, the species must be able to stand on its own feet (if it has them) and be extensible and maintainable by maintainers long into the future. For example, a proposed species might be inspired by a lion-headed alien species in a comic the author of the proposal is a fan of, and they may reference that species in their proposal. However, a species must not be a close or direct lift of the original concept, and must show effort and consideration for Space Station 14’s style and tone.

A species must not have an ability, theme, gimmick or otherwise that is only existant or relevant for servers that require roleplaying. This sort of design is suitable to HRP servers, but Wizard’s Den species must be compatible with all levels of roleplay. For example, a species that has a capitalistic culture might spawn with some of their culture’s currency to make trades with. Without a mechanical underpinning for this, this concept cannot be reliably explored on non-HRP servers, and is to be avoided.

Rule 2: New Design

A species must represent an opportunity for evolving Space Station 14. This can involve:

• adding a completely new design idea
• a significant remix of an existing design idea
• fixing or overhauling pre-existing design

This new design idea must be non-trivial, and likely to be interacted with by a player semi-frequently during gameplay, and cannot be trivially accomplished by a common item separately.

For example, a dragon-themed species might be able to snort enough fire to light a cigarette (or a plasma-filled room). Whilst this is an interesting gimmick, it is unlikely to come up in gameplay often enough to be impactful, especially when the monkey next to them can accomplish the same effect with a welding torch.

To improve the above example, the dragon-themed species might be focussed on the chemical reactions that allow that species to breathe fire. Maybe if the dragon-themed species drinks different chemcicals, it could breathe different effects, like breathing acid, freezing air, or unusually-coloured flame. This would represent the same basic concept, but built out into a mechanic that has a higher chance of being explored and engaged with across a variety of roles.

New species proposals must not attempt to use quantity of features to circumvent this rule. It is not acceptable for a species to be proposed with several “bolt-on” features in lieu of of a centrally interesting one.

In certain circumstances, a species that demonstrates a sufficiently interesting use of current mechanics, potentially in service of some other in-development content, may be granted exemption from this rule (see The Golden Rule above).

Rule 3: Balance

Species must be conceptually within the power window of other round-start species.

Species proposals must articulate the general upsides, downsides and sidegrades a player will encounter when playing that species. This proposal does not need to be mechanically balanced at the point of proposal; simply that it is capable of being balanced by the one implementing the species, and kept balanced in the future by maintainers, without removing or drastically altering the theme and design of the species. This proposal should not cover specific mechanics and balance tuning, but instead should be be focused on a small selection of noticeable general modifications. “This species is better in cold climates and moves slowly in warm ones” is preferable to “this species takes 20% less cold damage and moves 20% slower when in environments above its own core temperature”.

A species must not require accomplishing of its design via numerous small balance tweaks, as this is hard to maintain.

Rule 3a: Combat Impact

A species must not, under any circumstances, be designed in a way that makes them unusually good or unusually bad at combat. Combat is an essential part of Space Station 14, and species with wildly divergent abilities make the act of balancing it extremely difficult.

For example, a species might be proposed with in-built protection against common combat mechanics, like being being immune to being stunned, shocked, or slipped. Such drastic alterations are more suitable to mid-round free agents and antagonists, such as closet skeletons, rat kings or space dragons.

Having an ability that is useful in combat is allowed, so long as it is obviously (not simply reasonably) possible to balance the impact of the species in combat so that they are not automatically better than other species.

For example, a species might have the ability to jump forward a large distance. Movement abilities like these are often very good in combat, so care must be taken to ensure that this ability only adds diversity to combat scenarios, rather than strictly making that species better than others at chasing down a criminal, evading justice, and so on. For example, the leap might make the species exposed to damage for a period afterwards, require them to not be wearing shoes, or some other interesting downside to play around.

Rule 3b: Job Impact

Design should tend towards encouraging emergent interactions with jobs, rather than pre-determined ones. For example, a species with a tail that can pull things might be better than average at moving crates around the station, which is valuable to a Cargo team, but this is an ability that is useful broadly. Players should be able to find clever ways to take advantage of their species’s abilities regardless of what they’re doing in a round, including by using abilities that might traditionally be considered downsides.

A species must not be, as a pillar of its design, be designed to be good or bad at one particular job on the space station. For example, a short, bearded humanoid species fond of drink and industry does not automatically get to be better at being a miner or salvager just by having that theme. Adjacently to this, the design of a species cannot pre-assume how that species will be played. Often, players enjoy placing a character in a role that they would consider out of the ordinary, such as a terse and fearsome lizardperson working as a clown, or a cutesy mothperson working as a security officer. Players should not be made to feel as if they have to pick a certain species to play “correctly”. This would discourage creating a diverse set of playstyles and hurt player expression.

This is commonly referred to as avoiding the creation of a “meta” species for a job.

Rule 4: Speciesism and Otherwise Encouraging Rule-Breaking

Speciesism is banned on Wizard’s Den in its entirety. As such, species must not directly encourage the “othering” of those that play those species. For example, a nitrogen-breathing species that is poisoned by oxygen must not as a design principle be expected to socialize and eat meals in rooms separate from the rest of the station’s crew. A species might have the theme of being somewhat distinct and separate from normal galactic society, but when this is the case, it should be clear that they are still an equal and respected species on the station, and their design should outline how this is done, such as through futuristic technology or adaptions the space station has made to accomodate them.

For example, if an aquatic species has to live inside a water-filled suit at all times, they should still have the ability to wear a variety of outfits on top of that suit so they can express themselves like every other species.

This rule also covers other forms of rule-breaking. For example, a species could be themed around demons, but specifically theming a species around certain succubus/incubus tropes would obviously be too problematic to be suitable for Wizard’s Den.

Rule 5: Deliberately Challenging Species

Species must not be designed in such a way that a new player, picking a random character and rolling that species, would have an excessively negative experience due to lack of game knowledge. This does not mean a species cannot have a notable, potentially deadly, downside. However, that downside should be recoverable from, presented obviously to a player who has no prior context of that species, and teachable within the game by other players.

At a minimum, when picking a species which could be challenging to a new player, a guidebook entry exists to help that player play the species, and that guidebook entry must appear when that species is picked for the first time, and this page must be focused on assisting the player with how to play the species, not simply being relegated to an encyclopedia entry on that species’s mechanics.

For example: a species suffers from oxygen poisoning. This means they must wear internals at all times, except in specific circumstances where oxygen is not present. This species should not punish the player by dying rapidly if their internals fail or are removed, and, if they do die, they should be revivable.

If a species is significantly challenging to play as, compared to normal round-start species, the following rules apply:

• It must not be able to be selected round-start by new players without clear warnings and tutorialization in place.
• It should not be able to be picked if a random species is chosen for a midround ghost role.
• It should be given careful consideration on its impact on certain team antagonists, such as Nuclear Operatives, if that species is played as one of the team. (For example, a species that cannot wear shoes may be significantly disadvantaging to a Nuclear Operative team that can’t provide that species with access to slip resistance.)

Deliberately challenging species must not be designed in such a way as to promote speciesism (see Rule 4 above).

Species that are deliberately challenging must not negatively impact round flow for other players. For example, a species may require being sealed in an airtight suit to avoid exploding. If the airtight suit is ruptured, it would be unacceptable if the resultant explosion commonly resulted in the deaths of those around them.

Rule 6: Admin burden

A species must not have a powerful mechanic or ability that creates burden for the in-game or out-of-game admin team, either by a requirement for rulings or increasing admin help chat load.

A species must not require a specific admin policy in order to manage. For example, Diona nymphs may in-universe and mechanically transmit their former host’s brain into a new form, but such a new form should be covered by normal new life/revival rules, not an expectation of the writing of a new, specific, rule.

Rule 7: Technical Feasibility

Some more out-there designs for species are wholly within the sort of concept that Space Station 14 would love to have, but would represent a significant technical problem to implement or maintain.

For example, a species may be unusually large, requiring a 64x64px sprite. Because all clothing sprites are sprited for 32x32px, it would be technically unfeasible to support this species without an excessively-significant amount of respriting and aggressive use of displacement maps.

The proposer of a species should be able to break down the technical workload required to bring the species to life, and should be capable of at least part of that workload themselves.

Rule 8: Circumvention of Intentional Game Design

Species must not circumvent a significant portion of gameplay. If they do, this gameplay must not be essential to roundflow and an equivalent mechanic should be put in place.

Rule 8a: No Circumvention of Important Game Design

There are many important pillars of Space Station 14’s sandbox, and species must not circumvent these. Examples of these pillars include, but are not limited to:

• Medical science
• Atmospherics/spacing
• Conversion to team antagonists
• Being unable to access parts of the station due to access restrictions
• Being able to be incapacitated by violence (i.e. being blown up, shot, maimed, and so on).

For example, a robotic species without organs, blood or any equivalencies to a mortal shell that can repair itself rather than need to ever visit the medical department would completely circumvent that entire department’s job role, and thus would not be allowed.

A test for if this rule is failed is to imagine a round of 80 players who all picked the species. If the round would be drastically altered by this - such as a department ceasing to have a role to play, an antagonist being unable to work effectively, and so on - then this rule is failed.

Rule 8b: Equivalency when Circumventing Less Important Game Design

There are a lot of game mechanics in Space Station 14 that are not tied into the core job players have in the round. This includes the activies of all of the Service roles, but also things like how Cargo and Science progress each round.

For example, a robotic species might not need to eat or drink. This means that they would never have a reason to go to the chef or the barkeeper, so an equvialent reason should be designed for that species to need to interact with those roles, such as giving chefs access to batteries they can “feed” the robot, and the barkeeper having access to lubricants, oils and so on that the robot might enjoy.

Rule 9: Overpowered Species With Critical Flaws

Species must not be balanced so as to be unusually powerful (so as to be strictly, objectively and clearly better in non-trivial ways) if not for a critical flaw reigning in their utility.

These species represent a balancing tightrope for maintainers, especially in a game with constantly-evolving content and balance, and such varied gameplay experiences round-to-round, such as Space Station 14.

An example of being held back by only one thing would be a species that has an unusually high amount of effective health but a major weakness to being stunned. Such extreme designs often work on paper, and may even work in practice on first implementation, but are vulnerable to being exploited by players past the point of being fun. In this example, the weakness to being stunned may be so bad as to make combat against the species entirely one-dimensional, or via the collection and use of specific in-game items and mechanics be evaded entirely, creating a species that requires a draining series of hotfixes and patches to bring back to effective parity.

Rule 10: Accessibility

Species must not use a design theme that would non-trivially interact with a player’s in-real-life disability or condition.

For this rule, it’s important to remember the difference between species design and a species mechanic. It is acceptable for a species to be, as designed, having a downside like “poor eyesight”, as long as that is technically feasible to be done without causing issue (see rule 7 above). It is not acceptable for species design to be unimplementable without causing an accessbility issue.

For example: a player is red-green colorblind. A species that has mandatory red-green colorblindness would therefore not impact that player at all. Likewise, a player with yellow-blue colorblindness would be much more seriously impacted. Colorblindness is more suitable as a character trait than a species one.

A player may suffer from severe motion sickness when certain camera movements occur. A species that requires adding jerky camera movements, or other distracting visual effects, could prevent some players playing that species, which is unfair.

A player may be visually sensitive to flashes (e.g. they have epilepsy). For obvious reasons, a species that causes the screen to flash would be unfair to that player.

What To Do If Your Species Is Declined

If you have not found success in your concept for a new species, there are a few options you can take.

Submit to a downstream instead

Downstreams fulfil specific niches and do not have the same development and maintenance requirements as Wizard’s Den. As such, many downstreams would gladly accept a design that Wizard’s Den has passed on. In time, these downstreams may iterate and develop these designs into one that Wizard’s Den could accept.

Create a “subspecies” via markings

Consider if your idea for a species could instead be done via new markings or other extensions to a current species. For example, a “synthetic lizardperson” species does not need to be a specific species in its own right to still be readable and playable as this concept on Wizard’s Den.

Create the sprites and sound effects anyway

There is a serious lack of sprite and audio variety for Space Station 14 servers. Even if the exact right balance of design and features for your species has not been found, someone else might be able to “carry the torch” in the future and finally get a proposal accepted.

Collaborate and Try Again

Consider what the problems with your proposal are and talk to others about them. See if other people have ideas or suggestions. Research species on downstreams and talk to maintainers about what they’d be interested in accepting.

Once you’ve done your research, create a new proposal and, within, explain what you’ve changed since your last proposal and why. Good luck!

Modifying Species After Introduction

From time-to-time, a species that was previously added to Space Station 14 may be reviewed by maintainers. This review would focus on that species’ current quality and conformance to the above rules, and propose remediating remedies, if appropriate, to bring the species up to standard.

This does not need to be a formalized review process. However, the following are some guiding principles that should be followed when altering how a species works.

Change Mechanics, not Design, When Possible

Species are primarily built using mechanics that reinforce the species’s design. It is common to refer to important elements of a design as a ‘design pillar’, and mechanics exist to allow those pillars to be reflected in game.

For example, a fairy-themed species might have a design pillar of having access to ‘trickery magic’, such as being able to cause noises at a distance, minor illusions, strange lights, and so on. Inside Space Station 14, these might be reflected by giving the species access to a couple of abilities on a cooldown that demonstrate the pillar.

It is relatively easy to change the mechanics of a species. For example, if the actions the fairy species had access to were lackluster, a maintainer could introduce interesting additional effects, a power system to manage the ability, or new abilities to reinforce the pillar further.

It is very difficult to change design pillars. To continue the above example, maintainers might want to swap out the fairy species’s access to trickery magic for the ability to talk to animals, or outright remove the mechanic due to balance concerns. This should be avoided if possible, and alternatives found that support the design pillar of the species. Abandoning intentional design elements of a species will lead to that species becoming less distinct and characterful within Space Station 14, and has a high chance of infuriating players of that species.

Likewise, adding new design pillars to an existing species must be done carefully, with consideration about how the new pillar(s) would affect the overall themes of the species.

Have A Clear Goal

When maintaining a round-start species, the goals of the maintenance should be one or more of the following:

1. To improve the species so that its in-game presence more closely aligns to its intended design.
2. To ‘lean in’ to how players have engaged with the species to reflect the cultural evolution of the game over time.
3. To update the species’s core design principles to alignment with how Space Station 14 has mechanically evolved.
4. To resolve standing issues with the design, such as an emergent issue not noticed during the species’ introduction.
5. To bring legacy species from before this policy document was created up to the standards of this policy document.

It is important to avoid burning time and energy on species maintenance without having a clear understanding of what you want to achive. Historically, debates about species and their design have taken up a lot of discussion time, often because those involved in the discussion have different goals for the changes.

Work With The Players

Players are often responsible for conflicting and hard-to-undestand feedback on elements of design. However, they as a group have far more time and far more experience playing with and around a species than any maintainer hoping to successfully improve that species.

Consulting and working with players when wanting to change a species has several clear benefits:

1. Community buy-in to potentially difficult design changes can be sought, preventing issues when changes are made.
2. Ideas can be generated that are more diverse than what can be thought up by the maintainers.
3. Ideas can be tested and “run past” players before potentially lengthy maintenance work is done, preventing wasted time.

In general, maintaining a place for interested players to talk about the changes, where players can keep track of what is happening with the changes, and where feedback can be sought, is a good idea. This is a good use of a forum thread on our development design discussion section. Discord threads are not recommended, as they tend to get side-tracked and are hard to catch up on discussion on, but they can work to support a Discourse thread.

Removal of a Species Outright Should Be Rare

A species is the first and most important choice a player makes when building a Space Station 14 character. As such, removing species from the game effectively involves deleting player characters. This sort of change can be controversial, and must be handled responsibly.

Outright removal of a species that has been deployed outside of an event (such as April Fools or Christmas) or a test-merge to Vulture must be handled carefully and given proper consideration. Even if a species is strongly disliked by many maintainers, it is not automatically a given that the removal of that species would be welcomed by players.