Jedi High Council

[Soeht]

I guess if that's the case, how about this:
Rule for appointing new members: Should there be a time to make a player-character a Council member, or if there is a vacancy at any point, the sitting Council members will begin an in-character thread to discuss on who to appoint. The nominations can be anyone the Council members wish, yet it is tradition to only nominate Masters or Knights that are to become Masters upon accepting the seat.

Once a name has been nominated to take an open seat, the Council members will vote on whether to accept the new member. The Council must unanimously agree to accept the new member. If the Council does not reach a unanimous agreement, then the seat shall remain vacant until a member is accepted.

 

[Syn]

Sounds good

 

[Josh Dragovalor]

@[member="Daella Apparine"] That sounds interesting, problem is we don't DECIDE if they become Masters or not. Well, we do, but it's a 2 vote process remember. In my opinion, there should be a Knight Represenative at all times, like there is currently, and they serve that position until they quit, die or become a Master themselves, and earn a seat on the Council full time that way. When one of the three happens, then the above can be done again out of the Knights that are nominated, and a new Knight Rep will take their former spot.

 

[Soeht]

I know how the mastering process is. Just pointing out what happens in canon, and it's ultimate up to the sitting members on who they appoint.

Now for the next thing: Number of seats.

Canon for both Jedi Orders has been 12 seats. As I stated in the lead, there's no reason to not have 12 seats. There's also no reason to have all filled, even by a player-character. Anyone opposed to having 12 seats, even if usually not all will be filled by player-characters? If so, there will usually be a spot for a Master that has exemplary activity or something.

 

[Josh Dragovalor]

I agree with the 12 seats, at least, rule. But since I don't want to hog it here... @[member="Darron Wraith"], @[member="Syn"]... What do you guys think?

 

[Syn]

I am all for twelve seats. Coming up with names is always fun

 

[Selena Halcyon]

Twelve seats makes heaps of sense.

Former Members:
Selena Halcyon
Feena

Jaxton Ravos (knight)

 

[Selena Halcyon]

Also, this Knight Representative thing is kind of silly. I'd say it should be eliminated. After all, Anakin sitting on the council as a Knight was considered unheard of.

 

[Soeht]

I've added 12 to the number of seats.

Next thing: Terms and their limits.

What I stated in the lead about that was:
Term of office in the Old Jedi Order was split into three parts: lifetime, long term, and limited term. Lifetime members obviously served til death or resigning. Long-term members served upwards to ten years. The term was flexible. Limited-term members served in a measure of several months to a couple years. Times can be modified to be relative to real-time. Otherwise, we could assume all seats are for life.

Thoughts about this?

Also, about the Knight thing: the Old Jedi Order technically had 3 ranks that had any change in duties and responsibilities, yet they aren't the ranks you may think of. They go: Jedi Initiate, Jedi Padawan, Jedi Knight. Jedi Initiate was essentially the official term for Younglings. Jedi Padawans were just as what you'd think. Jedi Knight included everyone that had competed their training and was generally regarded as another term for official Jedi, since Padawans and Initiates weren't exactly Jedi yet. Jedi Master was more of a symbolic title: as the Jedi's duties and responsibilities did not change. Yet, it was very prestigious.

 

[Selena Halcyon]

I had that nifty little book thingy that was released that is kind of silly but it is about Jedi. I could have sworn the only symbolic title was Grandmaster.

 

[Syn]

When it comes to terms on the council well we can't factor in everything but converting IC time to RL time would be difficult. I would prefer if your on the council your on the council until you go inactive, leave the order or die.

there are several titles within the order that are symbolic. the Sword of the jedi isn't anything special the one who earns it isn't suddenly stronger or have more to do they just have a title. Master are stronger in the force through lots of training.

 

[Selena Halcyon]

Sword of the Jedi, from my reading, was a title really assigned to one individual, being Jaina Solo. It was not really earned so much as Luke kind of like... "prophesied" it to her. Even then it did not really mean much of anything in particular until she started using it as the reason why she had to do certain things.

 

[Syn]

*double checks* Yeah I could have sworn the title was used elsewhere but Barsen'thor might also fall into the same section. Really most jedi titles denoted just what they did or could do. Jedi aces flew ship but all jedi can fly ships usually.

 

[Soeht]

How about this, Syn:

Terms of office: In character, there are multiple time limits for terms. There are five lifetime members that serve until death or resigning. There are four long-term members that may serve for over a decade. Then there are three limited-term members that serve for months or a couple years.

Due to the timeline in relation to real time, what type of membership a character has is not made explicit once he or she joins the High Council. Instead, terms are handled as such: the Council member serves until death, resignation, or the Writer going inactive. The remaining Council members are the judges for whether or not someone has gone inactive.

Then after a Council member has left the High Council, the remaining Council members shall decide what type of term the departing member had based on how long he or she served the Council in order to explain any removals due to inactive Writers.

 

[Selena Halcyon]

Aye. Wookieepedia also agrees with my statement that Master was in fact a rank not a title to a good knight

Anyways. Yes. Term limits to an extent are somewhat unlikely to really stick here as people come and go. EDIT: Great solution, Daella.

 

[Syn]

I like it. @[member="Darron Wraith"] @[member="Joshua DragonsFlame"] what about you two?

 

[Syn]

@[member="Selena Halcyon"] for grandmaster though

 

[Josh Dragovalor]

Easier to assume they're lifetime for player Council members honestly. Anything can happen after all, but usually players sign on permanently.

 

[Selena Halcyon]

I'd say it is infinitely easier to assume that they are temporary. I've been RPing for a long time now and I can think of only a handful that have been around consistently for all of that. Many come and go, and while many sign on for the long haul, that seldom lasts. This place has only been around for almost a year. Time will come when you see that people come and go and vanish more often than you think.

 

[Soeht]

Lifetime membership is fine. Though to explain my solution, it has practically indefinite terms for player character Council members. Terms are just given retroactively to explain why inactive members stop sitting on the Council.

For the Knight thing since it's off topic:

Spoiler

Wookieepedia also agrees with my statement that Master was in fact a rank not a title to a good knight

What I said earlier was in broad strokes. In The Jedi Path, Jedi Master is hilariously only one subsection of the book, which is split into four parts: Intro, Jedi Initiate, Jedi Padawan, and Jedi Knight. It's under Part IV: Jedi Knight and is a couple pages. It explains that the responsibilities of a Jedi Master hardly change compare to a Jedi Knight. The only tangible difference is that some sections of the Temple might be limited to just Masters and also that 99% of the time Masters are the only ones considered for the Jedi Councils. It's why I say it's symbolic. Though, while it's definitely a formal position, I think the better term for what I meant was that the rank is more ceremonial rather than practical.