Star Wars Roleplay: Chaos

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

On Hierarchy and the Separation of IC and OOC

Status
Not open for further replies.
This post has become more essential due to recent events. No names will ever be named and anyone naming names in this thread will be reported.

Hierarchy (Specifically in an FU faction)

This is a simple concept.

Master > Knight > Apprentice

It's literally that simple. An apprentice does not have the respect and prowess that a Lord does IC, and never will. Same goes for Knights. Just like Generals are above Lieutenants and Lieutenants are above Privates in the armed forces. The General is the leader, Lieutenants help run the rank and file, and Privates are the new guys. Ranks exist for a reason, and they exist to be IC (more on this separation later).

To further explain, here's a scenario:

Johnny the Sith Knight has discovered that the Sith Lords have called a secret meeting. He's been newly Knighted and the new respect and mastery over the Apprentices has gone a bit to his head. He decides he deserves the right to participate in the meeting of Lord's, so he weasels his way in and butts in on their conversation. The Sith Lords are unhappy about a Knight, who wasn't invited to their meeting, speaking up. Johnny, for thinking he's so awesome, gets killed as punishment. Now Johnny is dead. That entitlement he felt isn't working out so well for him.

Now it may work a little different in the Jedi, as the punishment would probably be some form of discipline and not death, but the concept is the same. This concept comes directly from the movies, as we saw in the prequels that the Jedi Masters on the Council did not invite Knights or Padawan's to the meetings unless they were the subject of the meeting. With Sith, who are power hungry and egotistic, they are definitely not going to allow Knights or Apprentices to butt in on a meeting of Lords.

Now this brings me to the next topic:

The Separation of IC and OOC

OOCly, a faction is run by an admin team. It's their job to help arrange things like skirmishes/invasions/rebellions and to keep the forum clean and tidy. It's also their job to enforce the factions rules, which are generally just the Chaos general rules. They value the opinions and ideas of every member, and will never tell someone that they can't do their idea (unless it endangers the entire faction, then they might). If anything, they encourage non-staff to promote thread ideas and help to drive the faction.

ICly, most Force Using factions have a leadership centered around some form of Council/Grandmaster situation. These people obtain the role through IC actions. These IC roles have no power in OOC. Yes, the people holding these positions are sometimes members of faction staff, but the rank itself is IC only. Additionally, just because someone holds this role doesn't mean you have to do what they say. You can chose to ignore their orders and do whatever you want. Ultimately, what you do with your character is entirely up to you, provided you understand that some actions may have negative consequences.

IC and OOC are never the same thing. You should never look at someones IC actions and OOCly want to do something about it, or let someone's OOC actions influence what you do IC. That's breaking immersion and is just poor etiquette.

This separation of the two seems to have become lost on some people recently. ICly not involving you in something that your character would legitimately have no involvement in is not a lack of inclusion, it's simply the reality of the IC world. Like the example above: Johnny wasn't called to the meeting ICly because he is not a Sith Lord and therefore has no standing among the Lords. It's not because the people writing the Lords don't want to RP with him, it's just that in that particular setting he had no business being involved. From an OOC standpoint, even if he'd been allowed to join, his writer would have been bored writing about his character standing around doing nothing.

If you cannot separate your IC from your OOC you are going to struggle on this board, or any board. OOC we encourage you to speak your mind and offer ideas to better your factions, the community, and your experience. IC, you have to earn the right to sit at the big kids table.

Respect is earned, not given.
 
[member="Ignus"]

I think this is something that is really important. I have seen instances where people judge someone based on their IC character. OOC and IC seems to be blurred a lot, which is unfortunate, but it's nice to see a comprehensive guide on it.
 
As much as this is solid, sadly I don't think anyone will ever be able to honestly separate IC and OOC fully and it's always going to be a big thing in any faction for people to overcome.

I think it then falls on the Faction and those running it make said Faction as open and "fair" as possible for OOC enjoyment which will lead to good progression and involvement IC - if it's not, then IC will be affected by the lack of drive OOC.

And what I think all Factions and leaders and Masters/Lords need to be able to do is give respect equally over it being earned and give people the chance to actually earn it. And on that example of the Sith way, it seems a far more stricter Faction to take liberties in for character progression that is, at the end of the day, fictional fun. I always fear the Sith are far too strict and severe on things like this, and really make those with low rank like they literally have to sweat blood to prove themselves.

As Masters/Lords have no "respect" IC for those below them or have time for them, I've seen people really struggle to make an impact on those with high rank because they are often over-looked and not given chance to be given respect, which then knocks them back and knocks their OOC confidence and thus bleeds into IC.

IMO, of course, as always.
 
And there you hit on something that is altering the Star Wars reality just for the sake of some people's belief that they should be included in everything. Sith are Sith. If you don't want to deal with Sith and the way they are, why even write one in the first place?

Again, this is a separation of IC and OOC. It's not that we don't want to RP with you (used figuratively, not in regards to you personally, Connor). Quite the contrary. Many of us will RP with anyone that wants to, but our characters may not treat you with respect. The character and the writer are not the same person and people need to understand that.

[member="Connor Harrison"]
 

TB-705

Guest
T
Sith writers tend to write really bad guys, which is fine. That's IC.

However, the issue with Sith has been and always will be that in chats, in PMs, in OOC, they pretty much by and large tend to act like their characters.

This is because characters have parts of the writer's psyche inherently imbued in them. You cannot write what you do not, in some respect, know. Sith characters tend to be a conglomerate of some of the worst aspects of the writer.

Thus, often the most difficult part of writing a Sith is not writing an evil character, but trying not to get stuck into that character's "groove" of thought in OOC.

That's my working theory, but I'm sure someone with a psychology background like [member="James Justice"] could confirm or shoot this down as eccentric ramblings.
 
Ignus said:
IC and OOC are never the same thing. You should never look at someones IC actions and OOCly want to do something about it, or let someone's OOC actions influence what you do IC. That's breaking immersion and is just poor etiquette. This separation of the two seems to have become lost on some people recently.

Recently? I wouldn't say just recently. Its something thats been happening for a really looong time and aint gonna go away anytime soon.
 
I just think people need to realize that characters are just that: characters. What one does IC does not reflect them OOC, and vice versa. I know more than a few people that write terribly sadistic, evil people, but does that mean they're the same way OOC? Not at all. Hell, Keira herself is morally questionabe on a good day, but that doesn't reflect on me personally. More to the point, it shouldn't. This is all for fun. Stop taking it so seriously.
 
Hmm, reading all this, it is of my opinion that just having some open communication might smooth things over. Miscommunication and not knowing information tends to be the biggest stirrer of confusion and frustration in my experience.
 
[member="Thengil Ri'Shajirr"]

No argument here at all. Every character I have ever made (And I have been role playing since I was a wee lad) has a bit of me in it, and every good writer I have ever seen does the same. Its like Method Acting, you gotta go to that place and dig up those things or you just won't be as good at it as you'd like to be. Plus, its more fun.

But I differ slightly in my opinion as to the reasoning. I think that we do that because it gives us an ability to explore things that we want to--I write James the way I do because I would like to explore what hurt would feel like and how I would cope with it if I lost the woman I love, for a personal example. This is healthy in some cases, I believe, because we are able to process emotions in a more positive manner (as opposed to beating people up, doing drugs, alcohol or so on. I am saying that because I think role play is an art, and art does that for a lot of folks).

The danger comes when, as you said that line gets blurred or when someone things I can do whatever I want and not get consequences. When someone expects no consequences and gets them, often they take it personally.

How do you keep these lines from getting blurred? For me what really helps is to "poison" the pot as it were. I put a little bit into each character that is the opposite of me. Using James again, I would never murder, especially as brutally as he does. Putting that barrier up reminds me all the time this is not me, this is fake, this is someone else. It really helps me and it helps me to not be so upset when IC problems roll around.

Hope this helps.

Cheers.
 
IC and OOC never get fully separated. We have a great system for factions on chaos. If a faction doesn't make it's new members feel welcome on an OOC level the faction dies out very quickly and you end up with an admin team sitting on their own in an empty faction wondering why they have no members any more.

Every faction has its own IC and OOC hierarchy and there is no set option (KISS). Make your members feel welcome and clear on the structure and goals of the faction or you will fail.

Telling your members off indirectly behind a shield of "not naming names here" also seems pretty toxic compared to addressing the confusing with the members directly.
 
[member="Ignus"]

You were discussing ranks. The separation between OOC and IC ranks is a faction specific issue. Some factions don't afford a Master rank leadership over a Knight IC. They may have ten post Generals who outrank Jedi Masters IC.

The general separation of OOC and IC is not the same, if related. It will never be perfect because people confer respect to the writer and their characters more often than not.
 
If you read my initial post you will see I was discussing both issues. I used rank as a way of discussing the second issue. It's called a discussion aid. And as I noted in my original post, the hierarchy discussion pertained to FU factions and FUs in general. So I'm not sure what your point is here except to argue. I'm not going to indulge you any longer. I said what needed to be said to remind people there are hierarchy distinctions in canon, and they need to remember to separate their OOC from their IC.
[member="Trextan Voidstalker"]
 
[member="Ignus"]

You're making everything more complex by drawing attention to the fact that you are airing a specific issue - "not naming names" -and by discussing rank titles.



How much respect does a character receive from another?

Whatever the second character's writer decides to afford.



It's up to that second writer to decide what that is. They can use any criteria they want to decide that. It is frequently done because the first character is written by someone familiar and respected and they've talked about what the relationship will be OOC.

A faction can, if they wish, decide a brand new character is going to be Supreme Leader of all armed forces purely because they already know and respect the writer. That's also up to them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom