[2 dismissal]New Rules for Head of Staff

[IAmCrystalClear]

Heads of Staff should no longer be able to take a non-command role within their respective department.

Why? Let's take the most obvious, abused example, Security.

We've seen multiple rounds where the Security Roster is made up of a Head of Security running the department, the Detective is a HoS the next round, and the Warden was the HoS last round. This is ridiculous. Firstly, it prevents other, newer players who want to play these roles from getting them, taking away variety from the crew roster, and making Security look more like a group of power-playing valid-hunters who want nothing more than to "keep the peace." I can't be the only one who goes "wait, really?" when I see three HoS's in security. Secondly, there are few reasons to actually taking a non-command role as security; you're essentially accepting overtime for less pay than your contact is for; a HoP is paid thrice the wages of their bartender, so why would they ever accept the role?

Security officers will get in trouble for playing cadet if they don't get their officer slot. This should be the case for Heads too. While this is mostly an issue within the security department (for obvious reasons), we should expand the rules to all heads of staff for fairness and to better respect the IC motives of it.

If you do not get your Head role, why not play a different character? It doesn't have to be a different department: I have three separate characters for different security roles, and each only fills their specific slot.

New characters open the way for new experiences, new relationships and stories, don't feel like you HAVE to play your command character.

[furrycactus]

I've never been much of a fan of this kind of idea, namely for the fact that were it to pass, it'd practically kill entire character relationships. For example, say two or three characters are all characters that play Chief Engineer on a rotating basis from time to time, and they're all good friends IC that enjoy interacting with each other and doing stuff. If it suddenly becomes disallowed for heads of staff to play lower roles, then those two or three characters will never be allowed to play or interact with each other on server ever again. You might argue that it's realistic, at least compared to real life, but it takes a big massive steaming shit on actual enjoyment as characters with an invested and developed relationship with each other are suddenly unable to interact in round. Not everyone does Discord RP, so that isn't always an option, and it's still not the same as playing in-round. You might just say "play Visitor", but that still makes RP difficult when command characters have to spend most of their time doing their job, managing their department, or having to deal with antags.

Not to mention, I've only seen this even remotely be an issue with security, at least to the extent that you're describing, so it's very much not fair to dick over everyone else.

Big -1 from me, I don't want established character relationships to become completely null and void.

[Rushodan]

It can, does happen in every department - however your reasoning is flawed for the following points:

No, they are not stopping a new player from taking that slot. If this rule goes in and the person wants to ready up for a specific slot they will just make a new character for the express role they were locked out of. There is nothing wrong with this.

I am unsure how it makes security looks like power-gaming valid-hunters. Perhaps that point could be elaborated on.

They may take a lower position for a shift if it is specialized and well perhaps they enjoy doing it? NT won't argue with having someone extremely skilled on the shift taking a lower position for less pay, especially if they have been in that position for years.

There are very experienced players who take cadet slots because they enjoy rping as a cadet.

Finally a lot of players command characters are the ones they put the most effort into, have the most detailed backstory with and just all in all just enjoy playing the most. Playing as HoS can be exhausting, its hard work a lot of the time trying to deal with a disobedient or inexperienced team and so sometimes people want to step down into easier roles for a break. No harm in this.

I run by the two slot rule personally - you get to be your command character and one other role. This could be a CMO and a surgeon, a HoS and a Detective or a CE and an atmos tech. Anything else creeps into the believable character rule. Perhaps this needs to become the standard if people agree it is an issue.

@furrycactus also raised some excellent points - I love using my hos to interact with other hos' on shift.

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

A Head filling in an empty slot is fine and sometimes necessary and should be encouraged.

For example, a CMO doing surgery when there are no surgeons is good. If a CMO refused to do surgery when there were dying patients I would kill them.

A CMO that does a job when we have people standing around for that job, that's bad. If a CMO ignores our 2 surgeons to call dibs on surgeries all by themselves I would kill them.

Heads also need to serve as teachers for people in a department learning how to do stuff and so the Head not knowing how to do the stuff they need to teach you would be really lame and I would kill them.

In short your suggestion would lead to a lot more  high profile assassinations from me being super annoyed.

[IAmCrystalClear]

I, personally, do not agree that someone who loves their job would work overtime for reduced pay. I love my job, but I hardly ever work overtime even at double pay; I just have better things to do at home.

A Head of Staff filling an empty role is totally cool, provided they are a Head of Staff on that shift. If there were no surgeons on duty, it is the CMO's responsibility to take over that role (providing their training allows them to).

There is a noticeable issue with this system in that when there are two head-of-staff characters on shift together, the current head of staff is far more likely to ask the other one to do a specific task over other members of the department: it makes sense, they're another head and thus can be trusted, right?

Security in particular has a running issue with players being labelled as valid-hunting and power-gaming, we've recently seen the spike in taser-gloves in security mains for example. Detectives who take Officer slots when they don't get Detective are, in theory, taking on a role they shouldn't have much training for; if a detective is front-lining with officers they're doing something wrong and thus they shouldn't be taking the officer slot, you're once again extremely overqualified for a role with less pay. The same goes for HoS players, but their role is far less likely to be taken and the pay-gap is far more extreme, they also suffer with the issue of explaining their loyalty implant believably, as NT would almost certainly have the implant active on HoS characters if they are working, but it would be considered powergaming to act in such a way.

[veradox]

lame idea; nobody is going to stop playing their favorite characters because someone RNG'd harder than them and simply because they made the mistake of advancing their character up the corporate ladder, and now they cant join the round using the mindset and enthusiasm they were aiming to play with.

people don't trust other heads of staff players because they are heads of staff, they trust them because they're good at the job or are known for possessing x skill that can be utilized. there are countless heads of staff who are braindead r*tards and, while vying for power in tenuous situations, will not be granted it because they do not display qualities becoming of someone who can be trusted as a wingman or trustworthy person in general. the ability to showcase experience and prowess outranks the fact that a character sometimes plays as a head role and fails to produce memorable positive results to anyone except themselves in every scenario except where characters are literally not eligible in the lore for that trust.

paygap issue is a nonissue. either work as a head of staff or dont work your shift at all? much more significant pay decrease. rotating out heads of departments in this notable facility isn't a bad idea either for the sake of making sure there's a higher chance for a sane and non-overstressed leader in charge for the day. by reaching the status of a head of staff, you are ideally prodigal in your field and therefore an asset at all times to NT and will be established when and where you are deemed most effective.

improper assignment to role slots, powergaming and metagaming is a player sourced issue, not an issue with the system that is available to the players.

loyalty implants are archaic LRP tools and actively being pushed for reworks and modifications to fit into the setting much more effectively.

[Rushodan]

Explaining their loyalty implant believably? Same as a visitor hos or captain. It is only active when they are working in command. That is it. It is not required during other times.

There is no issue with asking experienced staff to handle specific tasks. There are people in security I would ask for specifically if it was critical to the round who are not even whitelisted for hos. I can name a few, but there isn't any real need.

I have never seen an officer with tazer gloves, granted I don't play all the time but I don't think it is an issue. At the end of the day we can bring up plenty of specific examples in every department as to why it wouldn't work in real life, but its better to handle it in a case by case basis rather than putting a blanket ban on something which is a mainly non-issue. This will be my last post on this thread as I don't want to clutter it. -1  

[Nikov]

My character didn't get CE, go to cryo, try again in an hour and a half. As will the rest of Engineering, which doesn't have this powergaming problem. We rotate CE-to-Engineer and just pretend we're rotating watches.

All the various heads of staff will never interact with their peers on station.

We had a similar question where Captains wouldn't be allowed to be Department Heads after playing as Captain. It flopped for the same basic logic; just let people play.

-1. Very hard -1.

[Soultheif96]

When someone else takes Captain, I naturally fall into Head of Personnel because it is the character job before he became Captain. I imagine it to be change of roster every shift, that included heads of staff and captain.

Big -1

[N8-Toe]

I like it! right now I see behavior I believe is toxic coming from this. People playing a char with an enhanced skillset over others in their department, or acting above others because "I'm an off duty CMO". they should be able to play visitor but I think people should be discouraged or disallowed from jobhopping command non command. 

[geeves]

4 hours ago, N8-Toe said:

People playing a char with an enhanced skillset over others in their department, or acting above others because "I'm an off duty CMO". they should be able to play visitor but I think people should be discouraged or disallowed from jobhopping command non command. 

Sounds like a player issue, rather than a rule issue. I play my CE as Station Engineer all the time, no one bats an eye.

You cannot claim to be "more important" when you're not the Head of Staff for that shift for the simple reason that you do not have the authority to do so. If a CMO joins as a Surgeon and tries to swing their command donger, laugh in their face and submit an IR if they persist.

[Resilynn]

I agree that drastic job changes are a problem. A cmo should probably not be in as a nurse, a captain probably shouldn’t be bartending, and hop probably shouldn’t be a janitor  

I think jobs with similar pay scales and skill sets should be fine. If it’s being abused by a character, report them, but there’s no reason a chief engineer can’t engineer or a research director can’t scienctist. 

[Resilynn]

Fun irl anecdote: today at work our HoS, Brandon, is coming in and making everyone hotdogs. Terry is doing the HoS work and Brandon is grilling things on the top deck. 

This sort of thing isn’t even unrealistic. 

[SatinsPristOTD]

12 hours ago, IAmCrystalClear said:

Firstly, it prevents other, newer players who want to play these roles from getting them

No, it doesn't. There's no difference in us using our Command member to get the job, or us making another character and getting the job. This isn't an argument that benefits your suggestion. Keeping us from joining as our Command member doesn't... "free" the slot.

Some people only have one character, and there isn't a rule against that. It doesn't make them a bad roleplayer for not having *cough sixteen* characters. They're connected and they RP very well as that character. So if their slot (which only has one position open) gets taken, they will naturally want to do the job their character was originally assigned to. (You aren't born a Command member. It makes sense for Armstrong to be a detective. Gonzales to be a surgeon. This is their trade. This is their livelihood.). Being told, "Hey, we need a surgeon, badly, and Gonzales is on the roster for today. Schedule him out there." and Gonzales, who likes his job, wouldn't go against that because he knows where his skills lie, and he knows he's needed. You could always argue the Command member that has taken a lesser job (nothing stupid like HoS to bartender, but something simple like their actual life TRADE) has agreed to do the job as a temporary help towards whatever situation is on-going. This is not difficult to RP around, at all.

I can agree that stupid shit like Commander to Bartender makes no sense, and shouldn't happen.

 

[Nantei]

15 hours ago, IAmCrystalClear said:

There is a noticeable issue with this system in that when there are two head-of-staff characters on shift together, the current head of staff is far more likely to ask the other one to do a specific task over other members of the department: it makes sense, they're another head and thus can be trusted, right?

I fail to see how this is at all exclusive to heads of staff. I know security man bad, but I see people do this sort of favoritism for any popular player, in any department.

15 hours ago, IAmCrystalClear said:

Detectives who take Officer slots when they don't get Detective are, in theory, taking on a role they shouldn't have much training for; if a detective is front-lining with officers they're doing something wrong and thus they shouldn't be taking the officer slot, you're once again extremely overqualified for a role with less pay. 

I am baffled by how you just contradicted yourself in the same sentence. You just said Detective's are overqualified, but similarly they don't have much training for the job???

There's a reason Security is a common job hop. Security has absurdly low barriers of entry. 4 months training is absolutely nothing, almost anyone could easily qualify for Security. A Detective is naturally almost certainly going to be qualified for the Officer role too.

Also, as someone who mains Detective a lot: Detective is probably one of the hardest roles to roll for. It's almost always taken. Please let me play my character more than never. 

[CampinKiller]

To add to the above about Detectives, IRL Detectives are, 95% of the time, officers who took an exam and did further training to become a detective. Not some random schmuck pulled in and given a gun.

[Scheveningen]

17 hours ago, IAmCrystalClear said:

Heads of Staff should no longer be able to take a non-command role within their respective department.

I agree, I self-enforce this by only playing my character in one role. This does lead to limited playtime with said character but I have numerous other options.

Enforcing this will certainly lead to a lot of the playerbase groaning, but it's still job-hopping, even if it's a less offensive version of job-hopping. If you really must play your character, why not play visitor? There's currently a command staff character that hops between RD/captain. I hope people realize that it makes very little sense to jump between pay brackets.

Edited September 5, 2019 by Scheveningen

[UnknownMurder]

On 05/09/2019 at 01:56, Soultheif96 said:

When someone else takes Captain, I naturally fall into Head of Personnel because it is the character job before he became Captain. I imagine it to be change of roster every shift, that included heads of staff and captain.

Big -1

This is not a command hopping to non-command, more or less a command hopping to a lower command. This is not an argument against OP. 

I agree with @Scheveningen's reasoning, the suggestion is unlikely to pass as we have sensitive players who may not have a lot of characters and prefers to stick to three or four characters. Unlike myself, I have already created over ten characters and used them diversely during my active time. I often turned a blind eye to this issue as a rare occurrence had happened to me long ago and (I shit you not) one quoted "I was but the learner last shift; now I am the master." 

[Soultheif96]

I am inclined to disagree as there are times at round start where we spawn in, someone already has your position, it is Captain McUrist, so I have a filler role, putting me in as a HoP, allowing me to still play my character.

There are times I will cryo over this due to RNG winning in the favor of other player, only to take up a role that is much needed like Chief Medical Officer or Surgeon, so on.

Other times, the round is well balanced in roles, so I accept being HoP and roll with it either for round sake or to roleplay with others.

[IAmCrystalClear]

As stated by @UnknownMurder. Command-to-command hopping is not on the same level as Command to Non-Command, but jumping between pay brackets makes little sense, as said by @Scheveningen.

@Nanteisaid that a Detective is qualified to be a Security Officer. This is true, really, it is. But a Captain is also qualified to be a bartender. The difference is the amount of training and qualifications they receive. The Detective role, according to the wiki, requires a Criminal Forensics degree or seven years experience in the Investigatory Department. Seven years is equivalent to getting a Master's Degree, give or take a year. The pay grade is different, Detectives are harder to come by, and require far more training, thus, they are paid more, as the field is more competitive. While the Detective can be an Officer, I do not believe they should be one.

@Resilynnsaid that they had an IRL anecdote for this. While I am unsure of her job title I am quite certain that the HoS in question is likely cooking hotdogs because they enjoy cooking hotdogs, not because they are being paid to do so. I go in to work almost every day, even when I'm off work, but I sure as hell don't offer to do work for reduced pay.

[IAmCrystalClear]

Reminder that the rule I have specified says nothing about hopping between Command roles. Head of Security - Captain is a logical swap to me, as is Head of Personnel - Captain.

[Nantei]

So it seems you've doubled down on the realism argument, and I am really not buying that as convincing. Some people would come in for reduced pay if they needed the money badly enough. And regardless, this is a game. Fun takes precedence over realism, and this isn't very atmosphere breaking for me. I can see people doing this in real life, some people work multiple jobs because they need money, and some of those jobs pay less than others.

Also, while you would not go in for work for reduced pay, some people might. If you genuinely love your job, I could see it happening. Hell, I have seen it happen. I know people who work for free because they are just that dedicated to their job.

Edited September 6, 2019 by Nantei

[Butterrobber202]

I would argue for preventing DRASTIC changes in jobs. Heads shouldn't ever jump down to bottom rung (or near bottom rung) of their department. But I don't see a problem with them dipping one level below their respective position. I also don't believe command should jump into Civilian roles (read:Service/Cargo) because have the CMO suddenly become a chef would break immersion in my eyes.

 

but yeah, thats my two cents.

[Sytic]

The realism argument is foolhardy, considering we also live in an environment where the Megacorporations would essentially be trying to hire you on for as much as possible, optimizing as much of your possible work-times against your travel needs and the current contracts and obligations of other staff. How hard is it to assume that some people would take more work, for less pay, but pay nonetheless? Some people really do need the work, e.g. IPCs, who make barely enough in roles like the Detective.

But part of me does appreciate the job-hopping argument. It would force a lot of new characters to be made, which I honestly need a kick in the butt about. I'd just prefer personally not to be forced to do so, as I rather enjoy my characters (Inanis, ODIN) and would rather not have to play Visitor when my narrow amount of slots are filled.

[Brutishcrab51]

My mother has a Doctorate in Criminal Law and a Bachelor's degree in Nursing, with an Associate's in Psychiatric study. She was both a Nursing Director and Associate for a law firm. She worked as a restaurant barista to fill in her time and have spending money while in Wisconsin working on her doctorate credits.

 

This is pretty realistic, to be honest.

Edited September 8, 2019 by Brutishcrab51