Monocle, top hat, and a properly fitted gown.

Funnily enough, in the books, Dodgson brought up a lack of rights RE gene made critters as a "selling point". The logic was, they don't got any rights, they're already extinct!Well, why wouldn't she? Why would being grown in an artificial womb instead of a fleshy one deprive a person from human rights?
Not to mention that a clone is never a "perfect copy", in real life at least (Chinese pet cloning labs often get "mishaps" where the cloned animal looks different from the clone donor due to miniscule changes in development).
He also offered a interesting idea where rich fucks could pull a Cecil the Lion on Rexy.Dodgson pointed out the window, at the barking dogs. "Animal testing. Let's face it, Jeff. every year, we get more pressure not to use animals for testing and research. Every year, more demonstrations, more break-ins, more bad press. First it was just simple-minded zealots and Hollywood celebrities. But now it's a bandwagon: even university philosophers are beginning to argue that it's unethical for monkeys, and dogs, and even rats to be subjected to the indignities of laboratory research. We've even had some protests about our 'exploitation' of squid, even though they're on dinner tables all over the world. I'm telling you, Jeff, there's no end to this trend. Eventually, somebody's going to say we can't even exploit bacteria to make genetic products."
" Oh, come on."
"Just wait. It'll happen. And it'll shut us down. Unless we have a genuinely created animal. Consider - an animal that is extinct, and is brought back to life, is for all practical purposes not an animal at all. It can't have any rights. It's already extinct. So if it exists, it can only be something we have made. We made it, we patent it, we own it. And it is a perfect research testbed. And we believe that the enzyme and hormoiie systems of dinosaurs are identical to mammalian systems. In the future, drugs can be tested on small dinosaurs as successfully as they are now tested on dogs and rats-with much less risk of legal challenge."
Rossiter was shaking his head. "You think."
"I know. They're basically big lizards, Jeff. And nobody loves a lizard. They're not like these cute doggies that lick your hand and break your heart. Lizards have no personality. They're snakes with legs."
Rossiter sighed.
"Jeff. We're talking about real freedom, here. Because, at the moment, everything to do with living animals is tied up in legal and moral knots. Big-game hunters can't shoot a lion or an elephant - the same animals their fathers and grandfathers used to shoot, and then pose proudly for a photo. Now there are forms, licenses, expenses - and plenty of guilt. These days, you don't dare shoot a tiger and admit it afterward. In the modern world, it's a much more serious transgression to shoot a tiger than to shoot your parents. Tigers have advocates. But now imagine: a specially stocked hunting preserve, maybe somewhere in Asia, where individuals of wealth and importance could hunt tyrannosaurs and triceratops in a natural setting. It would be an incredibly desirable attraction. How many hunters have a stuffed elk head on their wall? The world's full of them. But how many can claim to have a snarling tyranosaurus head, hanging above the wet bar?"
"You're not serious."
"I'm trying to make a point here, Jeff: these animals are totally exploitable. We can do anything we want with them."
I wonder if they could call Steve Irwin in for the task (Since he's not dead yet in this timeline and strikes me as the perfect candidate to care for an unstoppable killing machine)![]()
They already do this, also the two word suggestion is meant to influence you actions not create a new ability. It also doesn't need to make sense or anything you could literally just write in a color, or some random letters. As long as it isn't longer than two words I'll run with it.[x] King Points
-[x] scale speech
Dinos whit adaptive camouflage can use visual cues to subtlety and soundlessly comunicate whit their peers.
That wasn't made clear. Honestly? You need to more closely define what you want from the players because what you put up was so open ended that there was no telling what you wanted.also the two word suggestion is meant to influence you actions not create a new ability. It also doesn't need to make sense or anything you could literally just write in a color, or some random letters. As long as it isn't longer than two words I'll run with it.
[X] King Points
I honestly thought I did a pretty good job of it, no where did I mention new abilities or mutations, only that it would influence you actions. Either way I'll do my best to be more clear in the future.That wasn't made clear. Honestly? You need to more closely define what you want from the players because what you put up was so open ended that there was no telling what you wanted.
On top of that, asking for a two word vote to influence actions of the Mc without any clarification is going to lead to massive communication issues and salt as you interpret something completely different from what was intended.
I have to disagree, heavily. There are a hundred different ways to interpret "influence your actions". Honestly man, at this point I think you're putting way too much on the voters in terms of dictating things, which is also probably affecting your muse since you aren't actually writing what you want to write. There is a point where the GM has to start laying down options without write-ins. I think that you may have long passed that point.I honestly thought I did a pretty good job of it, no where did I mention new abilities or mutations, only that it would influence you actions. Either way I'll do my best to be more clear in the future.
I have to disagree, heavily. There are a hundred different ways to interpret "influence your actions". Honestly man, at this point I think you're putting way too much on the voters in terms of dictating things, which is also probably affecting your muse since you aren't actually writing what you want to write. There is a point where the GM has to start laying down options without write-ins. I think that you may have long passed that point.