Pokitbeasts (open rpg project)


thank you both, the project moving forward will go under CC BY-SA 4.0
and as drummyfish says the things currently online are CC0
i already posted my work elsewhere and will not change my licence on that work
so to be technical its a dual licence but to not muddy the github page the art overall will be coverd by CC BY-SA
if someone mistakes the hole project as CC0 would be trouble

i hope this settles this minor dispute, i hope this will help us for the future of the project and any potential sequals/mechendize

not sure how to manige the atributions for everyone do we just say artist or do we specify who did what beast?
@Pharap can you help update the github page licencing again and not sure if we do a credits file or apend the artists in the sprites.h (defenely need to make a credits screen)


Alright, I’m happy about this, thumbs up :slight_smile:

This relicensing happens – the stuff you’ve released until now will forever be licensed under CC0, it’s not possible to change retroactively, but you can happily just do what you do, that is saying from now on everything in this repo (even the new version of the old CC0 stuff) will be CC-BY-SA. I also agree it may be better than keeping a list of different licenses – maybe in a different place somewhere (it’s similar to why I don’t require attribution for my works – people are then forced to keep a long list of artists to attribute, sometimes miss someone and are technically doing an illegal thing). So if a specific artist wants to, they may simply contribute and also post it on OpenGameArt under whatever license they want.


Attempt at cave tileset – it’s hard with 16 colors :confused:



I was replying earlier but I’ve been taken offline for the last ~4 hours due to a powercut.
Eating dinner to the light of an LED lantern was interesting, but hopefully it won’t happen again.

I’ll say what I have to say anyway and leave it at that.
I only brought up NC because @adekto mentioned corporations.

I’m half and half on NC.

On the down side it stops fans of the game from e.g. going to a T-shirt printer to get a design printed on a T-shirt for them to wear.
Without the NC clause, they’d be free to do that.

On the other hand, it stops a big corporate T-shirt company from monopolising on the game’s popularity and printing loads of T-shirts using the game’s characters.
Without the NC clause, they’d be free to do that,
all above board and nobody could say otherwise.

The reason I tend to err towards the NC clause is as thus:
Essentially I don’t like the idea that we could spend weeks putting effort into this only for someone to come along, port it to Android, stick that port on the Android store and start profiting from doing so.

I’d rather ban everyone (but the creators) from profitting from the game.

The exact definition of ‘commercial use’ isn’t clear cut, but I can’t imagine a sensible court would rule something like handing out free badges or free T-shirts as a commercial purpose unless someone was doing it specifically to promote a business that they run.
Anyone who did want to use them for promotional purposes could ask permission, or there could even be a clarification on the readme saying “graphics are explicitly free for use by businesses as long as said business is not profiting from the use of said graphics”.
Such a clear-cut public declaration would be hard to argue against in court.

That’s fine by me.

Perhaps the best approach would be to have a separate art file for CC0 art and have that art duplicated in the main graphics area under CC BY-SA.
It might be a bit confusing, but we could stick an explanation in the readme.

Either that or just don’t provide the CC0 stuff under CC0 in the repo, which would completely eliminate the confusion.
It could always be hosted in a separate repo with an explanation as to why it’s there.

I’d advise being as specific as possible in the documentation.
Even if the in-game credits are shortened, the graphics themselves should have their details documented.
E.g. for every image.png have a corresponding image.txt that specifies all the details about it - the person who had the idea, the person who did the art, the person who named it etc.
Hopefully in most cases that will all be one person so it will be simple, in other cases it will be more difficult.

I know it’s a hassle, but it’s also an opportunity because not many games document things that finely.
Have you ever wondered who designed a specific Pokemon, and how many people it actually takes to fill in all the information for a specific Pokemon?
I know for a fact that others have, so having that information publicly available will generate interest (hopefully).

We could even do stuff like gather together to pool monster ideas, then one of us does the concept art, then another person creates the in-game sprite.

The art encoded in code files could probably follow a slightly more relaxed form and just state who contributed to the actual art.

I’ll have to sort it tomorrow because it’s a bit late to be fiddling with GitHub.

Besides which, we need to decide how to tackle it.
Should we put all the CC0 stuff in a separate file, or a separate repo, or somehow state it’s dual-licenced?

Technically that’s true, but it’s also possible to stop distributing it.
There’s nothing in any licence that requires someone to keep a file available to the public.

Part of me is thinking we should start off with simpler art (e.g. GameBoy Colour style graphics) and then add detail later.
It’s easier to refine art further down the line than to remove detail.

Just a thought.


Since we’re now releasing under CC BY-SA and I don’t have to fear loss of attribution, here’s the comment I originally posted and then deleted.


I couldn’t decide which name was better so I wrote both.

I like Hungry Ham because of the alliteration,
but I’m a fiend for puns so I really like “Jambon Appétit” too.
(It was either that or Michael Jambon, but someone beat me to it. :P)

In case it needs explaining, “jambon” is French for “ham” and “bon appétit” is a French expression meaning “enjoy your meal”.

Also, it should really learn a move for ‘curing’ ailments :P

Just finished the coloured version that I was working on before the powercut:


Normally I’d use the line tool to do proper smooth lines and take time picking specific colours,
but I decided to just do a rough trace and colour to get the idea across.
No points for guessing which game inspired the art.


ok, to be clear everything art is under CC BY-SA on the repo
altough it realy increased the folder with aditional files i geuss making “filename.credit” textfiles would be best or something so we can log who worked on what atleast a little

now we have this settled there is a discrepancy with that ham, its to cartoony XD


The ham is really cute, but I also thought it was too humorous. We really need a style guide if there are going to be multiple artists. Examples from existing games, allowed art techniques and technical stuff like resolutions, palettes, formats etc.


i know existing art examples would be helpfull but we are still in eurly stage so all i can say is build up from what we currently have, all the tiles are prety good, (love the mountan tiles) the player character is decent, and we only got a handfull of beasts so lets work on those a bit and iterate on them


@adekto do you want me to redraw this beast into pixelart, or is it no fit for the game?


i think this one will work well for our game, go for it :slight_smile:


Here it is, of course probably not final:



That’s gorgeous. A cool kind of an Egyptian vibe to it.


Will there be evolutions, or something similar?


for the moment i have no evolutions planned as beasts are summond you have to go find stronger beasts to use.
trying to keep this first iteration of the game a bit more simple, since its already realy ambitios for me


Do the monsters have to be serious?

Pokemon’s not exactly known for being completely serious.
Remember Golbat’s original sprite?

I wouldn’t call exeggutor serious either. Even before the *ahem* makeover…

They’ve been getting gradually sillier over the years.

Gen 5:

Gen 6:

Gen 7:

It’s Dragon Quest style.
You did say:

So I thought Dragon Quest:

Cannibox Urnexpected

And ended up with a killer ham.

If that’s too cartoony then I might not be of much help. I can’t really do detailed or realistic.


That was just my first reaction, don’t mind me too much. It’s definitely a good character, to me it just seems to fit maybe like a children game, while I looked at Pokitbeasts as a teenager/young adult game… that was just my feeling, no one can really tell at this point anyway.

Pokémon are sometimes humorous by their appearance, like animals, but a living ham is like a funny concept - maybe that’s the difference I’m seeing here.

Anyway I think we shouldn’t just throw away characters even if we don’t feel like accepting them immediately – @adekto, how about making a shared online document with:

  • ideas
  • general direction and guidelines
  • submitted characters, both accepted and unaccepted (you never know when we might need them)
  • other submitted art

It’s not good to mix these thing with the conversation here anyway.


I think the story sets the tone more than the art style.

Pokemon, Yokai Watch, Digimon etc have always had cutesy characters but are not short of adult fans.
(Let’s not forget the ‘brony’ phenomenon - sometimes your fans aren’t what you expect.)

So is a treasure chest that eats unwary travellers, but mimics have become a staple monster in a lot of serious RPGs.
You can have the odd humourous monster without subtracting from the overall tone.

Yep, this would be very useful.
I’ve been tempted to suggest forming a GitHub organisation but that would present some difficulties.


Ok I see. It’s hard to pin down to be honest.
First Pokemon has gone a bit far after gen3 the rediculas increased dramatically

I guess I’m still looking at a mix of cute and badass
I’m always a preference to evil looks so maybe have to look towards Castlevania for that little touch of it

I can’t really put a finger on it in terms of design
Not alone at least.
My design I’m working on is a dullahan armor (humanoid, headless)

It’s hard to make this decision. I think we need our own brand or feel to beasts to stand out


I’d argue gen 4 was still good.
Gen 5 was where the struggle really started to show
(though they still managed a few good designs here and there).

Just the art style or the monster style?
Because to be honest, when I think ‘Castlevania’ I don’t think ‘cool monsters’.
(I’m not a big fan of the Castlevania art style either, I’ve always found it to be overly elaborate.)


point remains we have to find our own style and i dont think i can do that alone and seems refrencing a existing thing gets resistance and taste problems, if i heve to go dnd on it then ill say i would prefer beasts as leaning towards the chaotic type as there a treat to the world hence there mages fighting them and capturing them.
maybe i need someone help out starting out the vague story elements wen i can continue work on the engine bits

basicly i realy need more inputs on this since i dont feel giving rules on art is very helpfull apart from the fantasy theme and mostly evil/chaotic maybe lower tear are more michshif, idk i would stick with them bieng pests to get rid off as quests or your classic lich shenanigans, though im open to more light hearted stuff i guess. i dont want to hurt creativity (btw not saying the hams bad just that it feels to cartoony to me then the mimics from dragonquest, maybe neerds more theeth )