Synced core design principles

src/en/space-station-14/combat.md

@@ -29,7 +29,7 @@ Combat should be possible at a range from low to high lethality, with the latter
     - Combat helps provide action to the game. Following [Bartle's Taxonomy of player types](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bartle_taxonomy_of_player_types), there isn't much in this game that otherwise caters to players in the *Killers* category. In other words, there are plenty of things which cater to the *Achievers*, *Socializers*, and *Explorers*, but the *Killers* out there would be missing a core part of what they look for in a gaming experience if not for combat.
     - The nature of combat having direct and indirect consequences for players means it provides a more intense experience overall. The bursts of combat is key point of immediate higher-risk action, even for roles that are not combat-focused.
     - For players who don't wish to engage in combat, the game has to provide options to offload engagements to those that do. This can be done through playing roles that don't emphasize combat or conflict, designing in areas where combat is less likely to occur/indicating where combat is more likely, and enabling avoiding combat as a valid strategy. It may not always be possible to completely disconnect combat from a player's experience due to being both core to the game and forceful by nature, but players must feel they have some control over the amount of combat they engage in.
-    - Without any combat in the game it acts more like a chatroom or requires the game to lean more heavily into its simulation aspects to make up for the lack of driving forces. While this may be enjoyed by some players, [the game is meant to feature elements of chaos](./core-design/design-principles.md#chaos) which combat handily provides. 
+    - Without any combat in the game it acts more like a chatroom or requires the game to lean more heavily into its simulation aspects to make up for the lack of driving forces. While this may be enjoyed by some players, [the game is meant to feature elements of chaos](./core-design/gampleay-pillars) which combat handily provides. 
 - Resource consumption
     - Combat (and moreso the consequences thereof) is a significant resource consumer, providing meaning to resource generators' gameplay. This includes the resources used to facilitate combat, but also fixing the consequences (e.g. Engineering repairs and Medical treatment).
 

src/en/space-station-14/core-design/gampleay-pillars.md

@@ -0,0 +1,60 @@
+# Gameplay Pillars
+
+Gameplay pillars represent the “core identity” of Space Station 14 and the vision for the experience of playing on Wizden/”Vanilla” servers. These pillars are the foundation for making features or mechanics, when creating a feature/mechanic, you are expected to be able to justify and/or defend the design with these pillars. 
+
+* *Designs that conflict with the core pillars will face much harsher scrutiny as they are unlikely to fit within the vision of the experience we are going for on Wizden servers.*
+
+Caveat for the above: If a design doesn’t fit within Wizden but may be implemented in a modular way, we can still add/support the functionality for Community Servers without directly using it on Wizden Servers.
+
+# Core Pillars:
+
+## Chaotic and Memorable *Storytelling*
+
+* Chaos should serve a greater narrative: ***Chaos without stakes or reason is just noise.***
+* The priority is to enable players to experience engaging and memorable stories while playing, rather than creating a tightly-tuned competitive experience.
+
+
+* *Players should never feel forced into a specific interaction or action*. Avoid situations where players default to a specific choice because it is consistently better than other options.
+
+
+---
+
+## Be ~~whoever~~ ***whatever*** you want to be:
+
+* Encourage and enable player self-expression when it comes to characters and jobs.
+* Space station at it's core is a lot like a Tabletop-RPG, lean into that to create immersive mechanics that reward players for getting into character.
+
+
+---
+
+## Teamwork is *fun*:
+
+* Group gameplay and progression should be incentive over solo activities/rewards as much as possible. More cross-department/group interactions create more opportunities for roleplay, shenanigans, and memorable movements.
+
+
+* Antags, Objectives and Events should push players to work *together* to overcome the challenge as a group rather than put the fate of the station in the hands of a few individuals.
+* Inter-dependence should be a mutually beneficial two-way street without feeling like an annoying limitation.
+
+
+---
+
+## An unpredictable world of Interconnected systems 
+
+* Gameplay should be the result of emergent interactions between various gameplay systems rather than resulting from scripted outcomes.
+* Players should be given the freedom to approach problems from any angle and use element's of the game's simulation as puzzle pieces to create their solution.
+
+
+---
+
+## A richly detailed, immersive experience in the frontiers of space
+
+* The world should feel deep, interesting and most importantly: internally consistent. Understanding lore should not be a requirement, but players who take the time to do so should be rewarded with engaging storytelling.
+
+
+---
+
+## Surreal Dark Comedy
+
+* An indifferent, but not cruel universe. There is light present in the universe, players just happen to be on the fringes of civilization where government oversight and laws have become more *“open to interpretation”.*
+* The overall tone should be humorous and lighthearted, yet still convey a level of stakes and severity. Patently absurd and hilarious situations should still be taken seriously by the world and players.
+* What I like to call the "Sseth effect", basically the game should create situations that are patently absurd when explaining to friends.

src/en/space-station-14/round-flow/antagonists/Wizard.md

@@ -208,7 +208,7 @@ It's important that the Wizard is not encouraged to just stay in their Den for t
 
 <!--
 Consider addressing:
-- How does the feature align with our [Core Design Principles](../space-station-14/core-design/design-principles.md) and game philosphy?
+- How does the feature align with our [Gameplay Pillars](../space-station-14/core-design/gampleay-pillars.md) and game philosphy?
 - What makes this feature enjoyable or rewarding for players?
 - Does it introduce meaningful choices, risk vs. reward, or new strategies?
 - How does it enhance player cooperation, competition, or emergent gameplay?

src/en/space-station-14/round-flow/antagonists/Xenoborgs.md

@@ -167,7 +167,7 @@ If you lack equipment or they get you via surprise attack and you are alone, it'
 
 <!--
 Consider addressing:
-- How does the feature align with our [Core Design Principles](../space-station-14/core-design/design-principles.md) and game philosphy?
+- How does the feature align with our [Gameplay Pillars](../space-station-14/core-design/gampleay-pillars) and game philosphy?
 - What makes this feature enjoyable or rewarding for players?
 - Does it introduce meaningful choices, risk vs. reward, or new strategies?
 - How does it enhance player cooperation, competition, or emergent gameplay?