Recently, we’ve had reoccurring questions as to what is and isn’t allowed when it comes to the queues.  For everyone’s benefit, we’d like to take a moment to clearly explain the purpose of our queue mechanics and to provide specific examples of what isn’t allowed!

The purpose of our queues is to allow players to acquire unique pets, and to spread our artist resources out as fairly as possible over the many players who like to acquire unique pets.

In order to spread our resources over as many players as possible, our queues have specific mechanics.  All our queues are first come, first served (artists don’t skip orders), and a player can only have one order at a time (i.e. you can’t be in more than one queue at a time).  Additionally, the sprout queue has an extra mechanic of a 4-month wait time after you get a sprout, during which you cannot re-enter this queue. This waiting period exists because we dedicate fewer resources to the sprout queue, and because we are trying to prevent the build-up of a long queue.

The majority of players who enter queues are “regulars” who frequently re-enter the queues to acquire multiple customs and/or sprouts.  The queues require a lot of patience because you are likely to wait at least 30 days to get through any of the queues, and you can only be in one queue at a time.  If you have a lot of customs, edits, or sprouts planned, it can be frustrating to have to wait a long time to achieve all of these goals, and it might be tempting to try and shorten some of the wait time involved.  In the past, players have managed to find workarounds to this waiting in ways that, while not utilizing bugs, glitches, or hacks, are nonetheless still exploitive.

To answer this question, look no further than Section 9: Exploits, cheating, etc of the rules which states: “Any intentional action which results in you having an unfair advantage over other players is considered exploiting the site.” Getting around queue mechanics gives a player an advantage over other players who are in the same situation, but who are using the mechanics as intended.  A player who is getting around queue mechanics can multiply their unique pets acquisition power, using up artist resources that should have been distributed more widely amongst players. A simple test is to ask yourself: “Is this fair to other players?  Am I using the feature as intended?”  If the answer is no, you’re likely exploiting a mechanism. So, in short: yes, it is against the rules to circumvent queue mechanics.

• Trading your pet to another player and having that player go through a queue with the pet while you’re in a different queue is not allowed.
• Trading your pet to another player, having that player enter the sprout queue with the pet, trading the pet back to your account, and receiving the resulting sprout after the 60 day trade wait period is not allowed.
• Using another player to order yourself customs (i.e. you ask a player to put in an order on your behalf, and you also pay for the order) while you’re in a queue as well is not allowed.

• A player may gift another player a custom.  Receiving a custom as a gift means you aren’t the one paying for it, and the custom does not go back to the gifter’s account.  However, keep in mind that we have created the PP system in order for players to help others get customs while keeping in line with the purpose of our queues.  PP gifting is, by far, the preferred method of gifting.

  It is the player’s obligation to gift customs responsibly and not suspiciously, as there is an enormous difference between a) gifting a custom that is six months old to a player who has no or few unique pets, and b) “gifting” multiple customs to the same person while that person is also in different queues.  In the second instance, it looks like the player is getting around queue mechanics in a sneaky way, and it will be investigated.  Again, ask yourself: “Is this fair to other players?  Am I using the feature as intended?”

• A player may gift another player a sprout, but it is the obligation of both parties to follow site rules.  If a player uses this to exploit the sprout queue mechanisms, the player may be banned from the queues or restricted from trading unique pets for a period of time.

• If a player does not own pets from a particular geness but wishes to have offspring from that geness, the player can temporarily receive a pet from the geness and enter the sprout queue using the pet in order to receive and keep a sprout from that particular geness.  This is fine so long as no one is using this as a method to get around queue wait times, and the player has permission from everyone involved in the geness.

Similarly, we’ve recently had users wonder and test what is and isn’t allowed with guest keys.  Because of the overlap with the issues we’ve been having with queue mechanics, we’ll also be taking this time to clarify the purpose of guest keys.

Guest keys allow players temporary access to another player’s account.  Guest keys were created as a safe alternative to password sharing in the event that you need to allow emergency access to your account.  It’s important to keep in mind that anyone who has access to your account can read your messages, write messages, create trades, create orders, etc., all in your name.  Guest keys should be shared with extreme caution — you are responsible for any actions taken with your account, i.e. if someone commits a bannable offense on your account through a guest key, you are liable to the consequences and can get permanently banned from Mycena Cave.

As with queue mechanics, there are also various ways to get around the intended purpose of guest keys.  These are not allowed, and again, ask yourself: “Is this fair to other players?  Am I using the feature as intended?”  If the answer is no to either of these questions, then you’re likely exploiting the mechanics of the feature.

• Guest keys are not a method through which to gain a second account legally.  A player cannot use a friend to create an account which is then largely only accessed by the other player through a guest key.

• Guest keys are not a method through which to join multiple queues.  You cannot use a player’s account through a guest key to create and pay for customs intended for you.

• Guest keys are not a method through which to impersonate the player account you’re accessing.  Writing any type of message and not clarifying that it’s not the account owner writing the message is considered exploitation of this feature.

All in all, there are many different ways to get around various intended mechanics of the site.  The ways to get around these mechanics may be easy, but that doesn’t mean they are allowed or that it is right to take these actions.

If you aren’t sure whether or not something is allowed, it’s best not to have the mindset of “I’ll try it and see.”  Our staff team is always happy to address any questions and to clarify any rule, and approaching us with your questions will also help us realize areas where we may have to adjust our wording to be more clear for our players.  As these workarounds are rarely done maliciously, checking with us beforehand saves heartbreak down the line, and the time we would have to spend dealing with the problem.

Thank you for understanding, and we will do our best to clarify any further questions you may have about these issues!

If a player does not own pets from a particular geness but wishes to have offspring from that geness, the player can temporarily receive a pet from the geness and enter the sprout queue using the pet in order to receive and keep a sprout from that particular geness.  This is fine so long as no one is using this as a method to get around queue wait times, and the player has permission from everyone involved in the geness.Rule Clarification

I’ve been super curious about this for a while and am glad it’s put into words! What I am still curious about is to what extent this “pet borrowing” mechanic might be allowable and at what point it becomes a possible exploit, if any.

So say; I have Sherwood, he’s a Dras custom with 4 large edits and 2 small edits. Since sprouts have a certain amount of edits, based on their parents, some might consider him valuable to have as a parent. Provided a user is hoping to get a more heavily edited Sprout for their money (to keep for themself) is it exploitative to allow them into a geness only to get a sprout using my custom to bump up sprout edit likelihood? Is this frowned upon?

And if it’s not frowned upon, can users buy/sell “rights” to genesses to one another? As in, I could make a thread on the sales forum, offering Sherwood into a geness shared by another user strictly for this purpose?

I bring this up because I have really conflicted feelings about this possibility. On one hand, this has some very non-canon story implications, since a geness/sprout lore does not support this kind of “transaction”. On the other, users who are only interested in collecting pets might appreciate this kind of mechanic being supported. Thoughts?

Lord
Staff is discussing this — we will try to get a response to you asap!

I’m really glad to see some of the gifting rules clarified. It makes it much easier for some future plans I have in the works :D
I’m also pretty glad to see a broad “This kind of exploitation is against the rules”  with some examples that are not intended to be comprehensive. Just because something isn’t explicitly against the rules, I don’t think staff/admin should feel unable to approach (and/or discipline?) someone just because something isn’t technically, explicitly banned.
Out of curiousity, what are the consequences? Banned? Banned-from-customs (for X time?) What happens to customs purchased illicitly/using exploits?

Though to be whiny I’d like to see some of the other aspects of the queue mechanics addressed as well, mostly concerning how they interact with PP (like Arin’s thread about sprout cooldown/holds, or my feedback about PP tax/UI)

Also, I totally misunderstood the purpose of a guest key. I honestly thought it was used to like, “show off” the site to potential new users. I didn’t realize it had all the capabilities it did and I’m SUPER glad I never sent one unwittingly to a friend only to find all my pets gone O.O

Finally, regarding Lord’s feedback…. Geness/sprout lore already allows for exploitative relationships (e.g. “studding”, slaves, etc) in canon, so I don’t think that aspect would be a problem?
_{(tbh I’m a fan of upgrading the sacred tree definition of “geness” to reflect this, since its current incarnation is misleading).}

I’m really glad to see some of these things clarified, especially about using other users slots in the custom queues that aren’t intended for the user making the orders. Thanks for this!

On the subject on offering customs as “studs”, doesn’t that go against the site’s lore?

Ahhh, I went through & dug up where I asked the question about breeding (here). It does go against canon, but I think it’s a really neat idea personally. :) So many people come up with great ideas that I’d never think of & the possibility of incorporating bits of that custom into a sprout is really exciting.

I’m not sure I like the idea of players “selling” breedings with their pets. I know there’s a lot of websites that do that kind of thing but MC isn’t really that kind of site. Most people don’t just put the effort and expense into making a custom just because it’s unique, but because they want a better representation of their characters. A lot of people are very attached to their customs/characters (I know I am), which is evident in the show off threads. I can understand lending a custom so that someone could get a sprout to join in an RP with others established characters and add something new and fresh to a story. But just breeding for the sake of breeding?

While breeding and sprouts are a fun incentive, I think breeding just for the sake of breeding and selling “stud” services is starting to get away from the main focus of the site as a community of like minded, creative people who write and art and RP and share and encourage, and starts turning it more into any other pet site.

That is, of course, just my personal feelings on it. It might just be me. I would like to hear other peoples feelings on this.

Thank you to the staff for the updates and clarifications!

i was too much of a weenie to make the post on my own, but i agree with everything Hina said. i GUESS i can see why people want to do that but… if you REALLY must, can you just get into the custom queue and have the artist inspiration be the customs you want it to be based off of?

idk i just dont like the clash with lore, it makes little doragons sad :(

mosh I did say that I can understand lending out for breedings that have a relevance to an RP, especially if it’s a non-canon storyline. It’s breeding just for the sake of breeding, or even just for profit that I am uncomfortable with.

If a character is just “like that” but none of the offspring are ever going to become characters or included in an RP, then is there really a need to actually breed all of those sprouts just because when you can just say in the characters profile that he is “a ladies man who’s probably fathered many”?

**I just reread your post and I think I understand your example a little better.  Hush’s Ilya from our one geness is a fertility diety made physical. He does actually help others have children, but there isn’t really a need for him to be included in the actual sprout making for any but his own. Others might feel differently but, again that’s just me.

**damn autocorrect xD

Personally I would not stud any of my pets, and I wouldn’t be happy if somebody asked to me to so.

However, if other people want to do that with their pets I don’t see too much of a problem with it. One person would only be able to do studding every 4 or 5 months (if you count queue times) and will be paying $100 each time they choose to do so. I don’t think it’d be a huge occurrence just because site mechanics keep it from being one.
There are already some sprouts on site who were made from two customs not for story purposes, but just for fun (I’m not going to name which ones for people’s privacy). When it comes to lore, I don’t like the fact that studding goes against lore, but I also know that most people don’t RP canon on here/follow the lore. 
All in all I’m pretty neutral to whether it is or isn’t allowed.

Edit: ^^ That stuff is all from an objective standpoint. Just thought I’d throw in that when it comes to how I actually feel about studding is it makes me uncomfortable.

I will say, in regards to the studding thing, there also seems to be a bit of a misunderstanding or misinterpretation in regards to how edits work.

An Ineki with lots of edits wouldn’t mean that their kids will necessarily have lots of edits, and even if the child might end up with lots of edits, they could be completely different in style and type then those of the parents. Parents without horns have had children with them and parents with hair edits have had children with wings instead. So the viability of any individual pet as a parent to another doesn’t really function in any way EXCEPT as roleplaying and just seems… Like one more way to turn what’s unique about Mycena Cave into something everyone else does.

It may not be exploiting, it may be something some people will choose to do, but… I’d, at least, hope not to see it become part of the culture of MC.

I feel like with the responses thus far, studding wouldn’t be a huge practice in MC. I don’t know for sure, because maybe the people who would do studding aren’t posting, but… People who would do stuffing seem like the exception, not the rule.

Edit: I personally wouldn’t do studding, but I can respect it if others do.

I’d offer studding :). While I do create characters & such here on MC (all of my customs are characters from other sites), I don’t follow the lore or have any interest in roleplaying canon. I love custom creation & working on my pets profile/development when I have the time, right now I’m not focused on roleplaying (that & there’s only one person on here whose stories I’d like to continue). These days on MC I enjoy item collecting, participating in events, & customizing my pets.

I don’t understand how allowing players to breed their pets freely would turn MC into a breeding sim? My idea of “studding” would be to set up a thread offering my pets up for breeding for other people to get sprouts. I personally wouldn’t charge as I’m not looking to profit, I just want to give people the ability to breed with my customs if they like them. I’d like the opportunity to breed with others to get more styles of art, there are so many designs/customs on here I adore & would never have the ability to come up with on my own.

I don’t feel like I should have to roleplay with anyone to be able to breed, especially if I’ve earned the money to pay with it (I can’t afford to pay for customs at this point, so I trade to get mine). Beyond that, not everyone who plays MC are roleplayers (or for those that do, roleplay canon). I don’t think they shouldn’t be able to get a sprout just because they aren’t interested in writing/story forming.

Lord and others who have asked about this topic:

Thank you everyone for your patience as we discussed the question of studding amongst staff!

Before the sprout queue was released as a feature, we stated that creating short-term genesses for the sole purpose of obtaining a sprout with certain characteristics was, while not in line with our canon, not actively discouraged. However, after further reflection and development of our canon, as well as observation of how the sprout queue is working in practice, we have reconsidered this decision. While studding is not technically forbidden, mainly due to the fact that it would be extremely difficult to enforce, we strongly discourage the practice and officially do not support it.

With the example we gave, what we had in mind was a case where a group of friends interested in roleplaying a family may want to give a sprout from their geness to someone in the group who does not own a parent in that geness. In this example, the players have established a long-term geness and are interested in bringing more players into the family unit.

While the majority of pet sites that incorporate breeding encourage the pursuit of obtaining desirable traits through selective breeding, Mycena Cave’s sprouts focus more on stories and characters. We would like to emphasize the significance of genesses in canon, which is part of why we do not sanction studding. It’s fine for players to use the site mechanics to represent their characters in ways that differ from the canon application of those features, but player usage and interpretation of site features do not necessarily equate canon.

To clarify, it is perfectly acceptable for players who are not interested in characters or roleplay to create a geness based solely on aesthetics, and to obtain sprouts from that geness. What we discourage is the creation of genesses with the sole intent to dissolve the union after sprouts have been procured.

Additionally, aside from being incompatible with our lore, studding out heavily edited customs for the sole purpose of obtaining heavily edited sprouts is not a sustainable practice. It would likely require us to implement additional rules for the sprout queue, both to accommodate the increased demand on our artistic resources, and to ensure that players do not receive unsolicited requests for use of their customs or experience pressure to allow others use of their customs.

Jacq

As for the consequences of exploiting site mechanics, particularly the queues, we are in the process of discussing it and will update everyone as soon as we’ve reached a decision!

Eluii Thank you for your response! I think that’s a wise way to go about it.

While I have feelings towards both sides of the story/aesthetic debate on studding, I’m glad the decision MC staff is making is based more on sustainability than “picking favorites” when it comes to user play-style. Studding out heavily edited customs felt like an unfair thing to the artists, since Sprouts have a flat rate cost. It would also be a bummer to see sprout costs go up or the amount of edits available on sprouts plummet, since so much of the fun is how unpredictable they are.

I guess I don’t really understand some of the distinctions being made here between “legitimate” genesses and exploitative ones….

The pet in my avatar was a spout paid for, by me, based on two site coats without characters attached, specifically for the aesthetics. The only reason I haven’t dissolved the geness is because lone shrooms are expensive and I’m not doing anything with the pets now anyways (also they’re super cute and I like them). I couldn’t be happier with this sprout. I love Murgl a lot and think she’s fantastic and have made a character for her that’s going to have sprouts of her own.
I don’t really understand why it would have been “discouraged” or “not sanctioned” for me to have done this? Is it different if it’s 100% your own pets and your own money and doesn’t involve anyone else? Or does this only apply to sprouts made from customs? It also feels kind of bad to think a pet I was really excited for and love/loved so much was created with the idea I wasn’t playing the game “right”... if that makes sense…

Off the top of my head, I can imagine at least two scenarios where it seems a little unfair to force people to maintain a geness: (1) The sprout character represents a child of a divorced family, or one where some or all of the parents are dead. or (2) Real life drama leads to one member leaving the geness. If the feelings on both sides are REALLY bad, one member can leave a geness with a sprout with the intent to cause trouble, right?

I guess the “reasonable” argument here is that exploitation is a “I know it when I see it” kinda thing. I can understand that, and I absolutely see the argument against striaght-up “studding”, but I think the way sprouts/genesses look from a player’s standpoint vs staff can be quite different. How much roleplaying is “enough” to judge a sprout as legitimate? How long must a geness be maintained before someone can safely break it up without being sanctioned? What if most of the RP takes place offsite, in chat, or via echo?

Jacq - I don’t think anyone is saying ‘acquiring a sprout for aesthetic reasons is bad’. The difference between what was being discussed and your situation is that with the studding situation, the geness is being created with the explicit plan of being dissolved afterwards.

As for both of your examples…

1: If a geness has a kid or kids, it can’t be dissolved unless the kinnen bond between child and parents is dissolved first(See Here). This means that organizing to have a child of two separate ineki not or no longer in a geness isn’t possible, so all familial ties would be purely based in roleplay.

2: As stated above, if two people had a falling out and wanted to break bonds, they couldn’t do so without dissolving the bonds all around. Breaking a geness maliciously isn’t something the staff would allow.

There’s more then one pair with sprouts, myself included, whose roleplays haven’t taken place here. And there’s nothing wrong with that, the staff don’t actually care. The problems come from it becoming a business that would directly impact the sprout queue.

Mori
I guess… I just didn’t see the clarification in Eluii’s post mentioning profit (which would be the implication of studding, I guess? profuit in currency OR profit in “more edits” or whatever). The rules are just against “the creation of genesses with the sole intent to dissolve the union after sprouts have been procured.” Which… would require all that stuff you mentioned anyways.

Also, isn’t it possible for a geness to have a sprout, break the bonds, and then for one member to form a single-pet geness and kinnen with the child?

But that’s good about the second one. I had forgotten. Thanks for clarifying! :)

We discourage the practice of buying and selling of studding services, i.e. short term arrangements with other players to form a geness with particular Mycenians in order to maximize the level of edits a sprout will receive for the reasons that Eluii mentioned previously.  This would mean a player would specifically be seeking to loan out their Mycenian temporarily for these purposes or would specifically be seeking to buy the service of one of these “studs” temporarily because they desire a high edit sprout.  In a studding situation, one Mycenian (the stud) would be hopping from one geness to another, and the genesses would be broken after the sprout was received.  For the most part, studding is seen as a “for profit” type of behavior, whether it is the selling of the service itself or gaining a heavily edited sprout well below its actual PP value if the edits were calculated!  If a moderator were to see this type of studding service thread in the forums, they’d be contacting the author and asking them to remove it from the forums since it isn’t sanctioned.

It is completely acceptable for players who are not interested in characters or roleplay to create a geness based solely on aesthetics, and to obtain sprouts from that geness.  This is similar to our stance on allowing players to form genesses for roleplay reasons we would consider non-canon.  More generally, It’s fine for players to use the site mechanics to represent their characters in ways that differ from the canon application of those features.  If you’re making and breaking genesses with your own pets, this isn’t something we would be concerned about.  It’s also okay for Mycenians to leave genesses and to have single parent Mycenians, as we understand there are a variety of situations where a player may want this to occur.  To support this, we have features like the single Mycenian geness and the Lone Mushroom in place.

I hope this more specifically clarifies the type of behavior that we discourage and the type of behavior that’s okay!

quite a few people have brought up that studding is against the site’s lore, but judging by myla’s clarification i think staff just takes issue with exploitative practices rather than somebody using the site differently than others. though the lore is central so the technical bits of the feature(like genesses being necessary for babies, even though someone’s character might only be non-romantic friends or roomies with the other parent, for example) remain in line with that and have to be part of the process.
studding, whether in line with a rp or not, could be considered exploitative so that’s why it is discouraged even though the resulting babies might not have a ton of edits.
at least that is how i am reading it :o

ive been wondering this for quite some time though whenever it’s talked about…what is the reason for specifically wanting to breed customs for babies as opposed to site pets? both are just as likely to produce offspring with edits from what i have seen, and the sprouts that come from non-custom pets have never been any less beautiful, special or unique in their coats/patterns. this would make sense one a site like aywas, where edits pass down directly, but not here. it seems mostly that sprouts are either based on the associated character rp or up to the artist’s imagination.