[2; Archive 2017-10-12] Allow Baseline IPCs to serve as HoS and possibly HoP.

[sdtwbaj]

Currently, only shells can serve in these two roles, because 'lore!!'. But here's the thing.

This sort of restriction seems rather non-conducive to roleplay on the server, and to one of the biggest points of playing as an IPC -- having a far more flexible range of personalities. A shelled IPC is very inclined, if not almost forced, in a way, to act like an organic, instead of like an IPC. The justification about the restriction is somehow to make an IPC in leadership less "offensive", and because "shells are expensive". I can understand the lore behind it, but frankly it's rather stupid, and strips a rather good amount of possible RP from the game. Whatever downsides there may be, it's far more interesting for everyone if they play out ICly. We're no stranger to stigmatized species.

As for an in-lore justification, it could be an attempt by NanoTrasen to show off how technologically advanced they are--they have robots that are so reliable and well made that they can serve, unhindered, in head roles. Forcing IPCs to be shells defeats the point of playing an IPC, you may as well just play as a human, or Skrell, or whatever you shell as.

The beauty of lore is that, since it's fiction, it's flexible.

[Kaed]

No. Keep your filthy robots out of our head positions. It's bad enough we have to suffer shells being in there due to some arbitrary antagonist contest.

Robots are not people. People do not like being ordered around by glorified toasters. They barely even like being ordered around by people of the same species. This isn't 'cutting off potentional RP', it's 'sticking to the narrative of a setting', rather than allowing special snow-flaking.

IPCs should stay in their lane and just do the jobs they were built to do, lest they receive the Ion judgement. -1

Robots, man. You give them an inch, and they try to walk all over you.

Edited October 4, 2017 by Guest

[Ezuo]

You don't need to act like an organic as a shell IPC, that is just the common trope. There is no mechanical or lore restriction that says a shell needs to act organic, and that baselines need to act more robotic. Besides, the limitations is what makes playing one of these marginalised races fun.

I hate to make use of the slippery slope argument, but if we keep taking away restrictions like this, what's going to stop every race just becoming a reskin of humans, with slight mechanical differences?

At any rate, the lore is what it is. Synths being in those command positions at all was a very big step lorewise, and a sudden "Oh yeah baselines can be in those positions" too wouldn't really make sense canonically. Hell, some of the crew don't even realise that IPCs aren't lawed like borgs or the AI is. THAT'S how marginalised they are.

Overall, I need to give this a -1 (If we're counting)

[sdtwbaj]

You don't need to act like an organic as a shell IPC, that is just the common trope. There is no mechanical or lore restriction that says a shell needs to act organic, and that baselines need to act more robotic. Besides, the limitations is what makes playing one of these marginalised races fun.

I hate to make use of the slippery slope argument, but if we keep taking away restrictions like this, what's going to stop every race just becoming a reskin of humans, with slight mechanical differences?

At any rate, the lore is what it is. Synths being in those command positions at all was a very big step lorewise, and a sudden "Oh yeah baselines can be in those positions" too wouldn't really make sense canonically. Hell, some of the crew don't even realise that IPCs aren't lawed like borgs or the AI is. THAT'S how marginalised they are.

Overall, I need to give this a -1 (If we're counting)

Some limitations are fine, and do add to the fun, but others work solely to detract, and that's how I see the no-baseline policy.

[Conspiir]

I may be a minority here, but I like limitations. They give a realism to the fictional world. The fact they can serve at all in those positions is surprising to me, and a large step forward. I remember when they couldn't.

You don't have to be like a human to be a Shell. There are so many subtle differences you can bring out that make it apparent you aren't a human. Never using contractions. Never saying the words "I feel". Giving off a general air of "That isn't quite human, is it?" If anything, it increases the roleplay potential. This limitation is realistic for those two roles. I'd love to see an IPC HoP that just kind of... stares. I'd pay good money to be unsettled by the heads of staff I know will always do their job correctly.

[Fire and Glory]

Previously IPCs could not be HoPs and HoSses at all, I fail to see why it has to be all or nothing.

I am sure there is a good amount of difference between being human and pretending to be human.

Not to mention not really pretending to be human at all is still possible (Example: Toronto).

[SleepyWolf]

Them being shells is to make them be 'Commanders' and not the frontline bots. Also, Nanotrasen wants to leech money out of these bots- having them be in debt to the company for buying these special Shell chassis. It just seems like a formal thing.

but ya -1 bots need to be slaves still.

[sdtwbaj]

Them being shells is to make them be 'Commanders' and not the frontline bots. Also, Nanotrasen wants to leech money out of these bots- having them be in debt to the company for buying these special Shell chassis. It just seems like a formal thing.

but ya -1 bots need to be slaves still.

 

As far as I'm aware, IPCs aren't citizens, so either NanoTrasen is borrowing them or owns them, the latter would probably be for any Head IPC. It doesn't really make sense for the bots to be "in debt" if the company owns them.

[Azande]

Only NanoTrasen-owned Shells can be Heads, as per wiki.

[Munks]

Currently, only shells can serve in these two roles, because 'lore!!'. But here's the thing.

This sort of restriction seems rather non-conducive to roleplay on the server, and to one of the biggest points of playing as an IPC -- having a far more flexible range of personalities. A shelled IPC is very inclined, if not almost forced, in a way, to act like an organic, instead of like an IPC. The justification about the restriction is somehow to make an IPC in leadership less "offensive", and because "shells are expensive". I can understand the lore behind it, but frankly it's rather stupid, and strips a rather good amount of possible RP from the game. Whatever downsides there may be, it's far more interesting for everyone if they play out ICly. We're no stranger to stigmatized species.

A complete 180 of what IPCs are supposed to be. IPCs should be purpose-built for whatever function they serve. Industrial for labor and security, Shell for leadership or human resources or intelligence (think Counselor, HoP, Detective; things that rely on personality and interpreting or manipulating human emotion and mannerisms). Baseline is your little 'canvas' to make whatever snowflake you want, but ultimately, IPCs are EXPENSIVE and that resource is going to be very tightly managed. You don't just make them out of your garage with spare parts because you're an AI enthusiast. IPCs are built for a reason, and they serve that reason. There is no IPC civil rights, you don't just decide "Oh, I'm an industrial security robot, but I'm so ambitious I WANT to be the Head of Security!" or "I'm built to be a doctor but I aspire to one day make my way to Head of Personnel!"

 

As for an in-lore justification, it could be an attempt by NanoTrasen to show off how technologically advanced they are--they have robots that are so reliable and well made that they can serve, unhindered, in head roles. Forcing IPCs to be shells defeats the point of playing an IPC, you may as well just play as a human, or Skrell, or whatever you shell as.

Stop overestimating just how much people in-universe care about IPCs. Regardless of how attached you are to your character or whatever benevolent figure in its backstory cares for it as if it were their own child, to NT it is a slave, a tool, and nothing more.

Echoing Kaed. Give an inch, and they'll take a mile. IPCs shouldn't even have been allowed in head roles to begin with, it was only a matter of time until IPC mains demanded the restrictions be loosened. Next it'll be IPC Captains.

[Promanguy1223]

Currently, only shells can serve in these two roles, because 'lore!!'. But here's the thing.

This sort of restriction seems rather non-conducive to roleplay on the server, and to one of the biggest points of playing as an IPC -- having a far more flexible range of personalities. A shelled IPC is very inclined, if not almost forced, in a way, to act like an organic, instead of like an IPC. The justification about the restriction is somehow to make an IPC in leadership less "offensive", and because "shells are expensive". I can understand the lore behind it, but frankly it's rather stupid, and strips a rather good amount of possible RP from the game. Whatever downsides there may be, it's far more interesting for everyone if they play out ICly. We're no stranger to stigmatized species.

A complete 180 of what IPCs are supposed to be. IPCs should be purpose-built for whatever function they serve. Industrial for labor and security, Shell for leadership or human resources or intelligence (think Counselor, HoP, Detective; things that rely on personality and interpreting or manipulating human emotion and mannerisms). Baseline is your little 'canvas' to make whatever snowflake you want, but ultimately, IPCs are EXPENSIVE and that resource is going to be very tightly managed. You don't just make them out of your garage with spare parts because you're an AI enthusiast. IPCs are built for a reason, and they serve that reason. There is no IPC civil rights, you don't just decide "Oh, I'm an industrial security robot, but I'm so ambitious I WANT to be the Head of Security!" or "I'm built to be a doctor but I aspire to one day make my way to Head of Personnel!"

 

As for an in-lore justification, it could be an attempt by NanoTrasen to show off how technologically advanced they are--they have robots that are so reliable and well made that they can serve, unhindered, in head roles. Forcing IPCs to be shells defeats the point of playing an IPC, you may as well just play as a human, or Skrell, or whatever you shell as.

Stop overestimating just how much people in-universe care about IPCs. Regardless of how attached you are to your character or whatever benevolent figure in its backstory cares for it as if it were their own child, to NT it is a slave, a tool, and nothing more.

Echoing Kaed. Give an inch, and they'll take a mile. IPCs shouldn't even have been allowed in head roles to begin with, it was only a matter of time until IPC mains demanded the restrictions be loosened. Next it'll be IPC Captains.

 

He's totally referencing me. I got reasons. +1

[Munks]

He's totally referencing me. I got reasons. +1

 

I'm referencing no one specific. But everyone's "got reasons", you're not special. Looking at your app it's just "Ok I know NT doesnt put industrial frames as HoS, but this one is just so darn good and strong he's the exception!" . Unfortunately. NT doesn't care how invincible and stronk your robot is, Industrial frames are front liners. Heads of Security are not front liners, they are leaders (at least, supposed to be). Your slave robot is going to return better on its investment staying in an officer/warden role where it's actually supposed to come into conflict. This is what I'm talking about, people who demand this only pay attention to how attached they are to their IPCs and want them to rise to the top, forgetting that IPCs are a bunch of purpose-built tools. Your reason for why your IPC should be HoS is fundamentally flawed because (aside from the issue of being an industrial frame) it assumes NT gives a shit how robust someone is when they take leadership of Security. There is more to HoS than that. Regardless of those 'reasons' you got.

By putting an industrial frame in as HoS, we're sacrificing leadership capability for just giving one security officer special robust gear and access to do his security officer things. Regardless of how much you fail to roleplay it, industrial frames are not built to understand the nuance of human emotion or personality. They are not leaders. An important aspect of HoS is diplomacy, defusing delicate situations through words, not weapons. Being roleplayed correctly, your theoretical Industrial HoS would fail this as well and get people killed. Shells are better for heads of security because their understanding of human personality/emotion is much more developed and they can handle matters like this with delicacy rather than relying on how uber strong they are. Your whitelist was accepted on the basis that Opamator would be upgraded to a shell most likely for this exact reason. You should stop trying to skirt it.

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

I disagree vehemently with the idea that restrictions restrict roleplay. "They all lived happily ever after" is the end of a story for a reason. You have aspirations and goals as a fully fleshed out character but society is pushing back against you. It's conflict roleplay.

My Tajara HoP is extremely driven to be Captain, but he's trapped by the glass ceiling, and that's a massive amount of his character.

The same thing should be said of IPC's. You can want to advance your characters all you want, but they are trapped by the society they are in.

[SleepyWolf]

I disagree vehemently with the idea that restrictions restrict roleplay. "They all lived happily ever after" is the end of a story for a reason. You have aspirations and goals as a fully fleshed out character but society is pushing back against you. It's conflict roleplay.

My Tajara HoP is extremely driven to be Captain, but he's trapped by the glass ceiling, and that's a massive amount of his character.

The same thing should be said of IPC's. You can want to advance your characters all you want, but they are trapped by the society they are in.

 

the same roof is for my HoS Toronto-88, the FIRST synthetic HoS ever with this restriction.

[Promanguy1223]

He's totally referencing me. I got reasons. +1

 

I'm referencing no one specific. But everyone's "got reasons", you're not special. Looking at your app it's just "Ok I know NT doesnt put industrial frames as HoS, but this one is just so darn good and strong he's the exception!" . Unfortunately. NT doesn't care how invincible and stronk your robot is, Industrial frames are front liners. Heads of Security are not front liners, they are leaders (at least, supposed to be). Your slave robot is going to return better on its investment staying in an officer/warden role where it's actually supposed to come into conflict. This is what I'm talking about, people who demand this only pay attention to how attached they are to their IPCs and want them to rise to the top, forgetting that IPCs are a bunch of purpose-built tools. Your reason for why your IPC should be HoS is fundamentally flawed because (aside from the issue of being an industrial frame) it assumes NT gives a shit how robust someone is when they take leadership of Security. There is more to HoS than that. Regardless of those 'reasons' you got.

By putting an industrial frame in as HoS, we're sacrificing leadership capability for just giving one security officer special robust gear and access to do his security officer things. Regardless of how much you fail to roleplay it, industrial frames are not built to understand the nuance of human emotion or personality. They are not leaders. An important aspect of HoS is diplomacy, defusing delicate situations through words, not weapons. Being roleplayed correctly, your theoretical Industrial HoS would fail this as well and get people killed. Shells are better for heads of security because their understanding of human personality/emotion is much more developed and they can handle matters like this with delicacy rather than relying on how uber strong they are. Your whitelist was accepted on the basis that Opamator would be upgraded to a shell most likely for this exact reason. You should stop trying to skirt it.

Look, I don't even consider myself robust and I never have. I also understand NT doesn't give a single shit if I'm robust or not. Myself as a player, don't really care.

You can judge my character all you want from appearance, sure I screwed up a little. But his original purpose, was for Head positions. I myself don't give a shit if "Ipc rights for head were won by antagonists getting the most kill." It's part of lore now. Sure it was big jump, but shit happens. But I literally got canon and lore reasons for my characters development and why he is where he is today. You can't change that unless the lore Devs says it conflicts with actual lore.

Another thing, I actually don't mind being a Shell. I can still accomplish the style of Roleplay I want being a Shell IPC Head. So I don't care if Baselines can't be Head. Nor did I support it, people only want it for looks.

But yes, the reasons you state above, are literally why I am a Shell IPC. Also because I have too. I'm not arguing for anything, I like Shell Head of Security better.

I should have never commented. Actually this would be better if this thread didn't exist.

[Faris]

Voting for dismissal.

I'm not a big fan for IPC heads at the time being, used to be but not anymore. I see IPC's as specialized and purpose built for the task at hand, while it is possible for an IPC to be able to conduct leadership tasks based on logical and reasonable though, the reason shells are required is for the humanization of the role among others. I cannot see myself justifying this.

[MattAtlas]

I *really* am not a fan of IPC heads. At all. They are still tools and should be treated as such, they should not be in delicate positions at all. We should have organics in sensitive roles, because said organics can understand emotions and are able to act accordingly to delicate situations. -1

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

We didn't gain Command synths based on antags getting the most kills....

Here are links for more information, for reference.

The announcement of the contest.

https://forums.aurorastation.org/viewtopic.php?p=74870#p74870

Polls of how people responded to the contest.

https://forums.aurorastation.org/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=7900

[sdtwbaj]

Currently, only shells can serve in these two roles, because 'lore!!'. But here's the thing.

This sort of restriction seems rather non-conducive to roleplay on the server, and to one of the biggest points of playing as an IPC -- having a far more flexible range of personalities. A shelled IPC is very inclined, if not almost forced, in a way, to act like an organic, instead of like an IPC. The justification about the restriction is somehow to make an IPC in leadership less "offensive", and because "shells are expensive". I can understand the lore behind it, but frankly it's rather stupid, and strips a rather good amount of possible RP from the game. Whatever downsides there may be, it's far more interesting for everyone if they play out ICly. We're no stranger to stigmatized species.

A complete 180 of what IPCs are supposed to be. IPCs should be purpose-built for whatever function they serve. Industrial for labor and security, Shell for leadership or human resources or intelligence (think Counselor, HoP, Detective; things that rely on personality and interpreting or manipulating human emotion and mannerisms). Baseline is your little 'canvas' to make whatever snowflake you want, but ultimately, IPCs are EXPENSIVE and that resource is going to be very tightly managed. You don't just make them out of your garage with spare parts because you're an AI enthusiast. IPCs are built for a reason, and they serve that reason. There is no IPC civil rights, you don't just decide "Oh, I'm an industrial security robot, but I'm so ambitious I WANT to be the Head of Security!" or "I'm built to be a doctor but I aspire to one day make my way to Head of Personnel!"

 

As for an in-lore justification, it could be an attempt by NanoTrasen to show off how technologically advanced they are--they have robots that are so reliable and well made that they can serve, unhindered, in head roles. Forcing IPCs to be shells defeats the point of playing an IPC, you may as well just play as a human, or Skrell, or whatever you shell as.

Stop overestimating just how much people in-universe care about IPCs. Regardless of how attached you are to your character or whatever benevolent figure in its backstory cares for it as if it were their own child, to NT it is a slave, a tool, and nothing more.

Echoing Kaed. Give an inch, and they'll take a mile. IPCs shouldn't even have been allowed in head roles to begin with, it was only a matter of time until IPC mains demanded the restrictions be loosened. Next it'll be IPC Captains.

 

Sounds like someone has a hell of a vendetta against IPCs. Baselines don’t have to /not/ be purpose built for leadership.

[Munks]

Sounds like someone has a hell of a vendetta against IPCs. Baselines don’t have to /not/ be purpose built for leadership.

 

Computers do not just magically find hidden talent in leadership. They are either given the appropriate faculty to understand and lead people, or they aren't. Shell IPCs have to be UPGRADED with the appropriate equipment to emulate human emotion, they do not find it themselves. If an IPC isn't made to be a leader, then it isn't one.

[sdtwbaj]

Sounds like someone has a hell of a vendetta against IPCs. Baselines don’t have to /not/ be purpose built for leadership.

 

Computers do not just magically find hidden talent in leadership. They are either given the appropriate faculty to understand and lead people, or they aren't. Shell IPCs have to be UPGRADED with the appropriate equipment to emulate human emotion, they do not find it themselves. If an IPC isn't made to be a leader, then it isn't one.

 

I’m not implying that any IPC magically finds the ability to lead. I’m saying that a baseline IPC can be loaded up as a leadership unit just as much as a shell can.

[Munks]

I’m not implying that any IPC magically finds the ability to lead. I’m saying that a baseline IPC can be loaded up as a leadership unit just as much as a shell can.

 

What is leadership to you? How does a machine that does not understand emotion or mannerism effectively lead people? Shells are "loaded up" as a leadership unit by being given the advanced processes needed to understand people. This is hardware. It isn't simply downloaded. Baseline frames don't have this, which is why they aren't allowed to be heads.

[whiterabit]

"A vendetta against IPCs" "IC Restrictions stiffle roleplay"

An important trait of our lore is the existence of oppression, racism and general inequality which drives conflict. IPCs are rightfully distrusted as they embody the idea of "has technology gone too far?" The skrell were fucking holocausted by synthetics, and almost all Artificial Intelligences in human space are lawed out of fear of a the same happening again. IPCs are some of the very few synthetics allowed to operate without a lawset and it's very hard for anyone to predict what that might lead to. There are already radical sects of the Synthetic Liberation Front and a large portion of our lore development was dedicated to their terrorist activities before the vaurca took center stage. Regardless of the hordes super space liberals who make up the player characters, many people would be uncomfortable working underneath a synthetic. This is why the shell requirement is made for the HoP and HoS, it's a way for synthetics to be eased into these positions with a friendly face.

Also, the idea that IC restrictions stiffle roleplay is a joke, heavy RP is defined by restrictions. We enforce occupation qualifications, naming conventions, and yes, we put restrictions which help to establish the lore and reinforce the races' place in the galaxy. Take for example the fact that Human and Skrell are the dominant forces in known space, they're both on good terms, and in human space only they are allowed to captain NanoTrasen Stations. Should we allow all races to hold every role because it's stiffling roleplay to deny everyone's fursona a captain slot? I would argue it makes for much more interesting roleplay to have a character denied something that they strive for than to simply let them have whatever they want.

 

Baselines don’t have to /not/ be purpose-built for leadership.

 

See, it's not a matter of what they're built for. An IPC can be built for leadership, and it should be if it's being placed into a position that requires it. If someone makes a synthetic Research Director, it's expected to be purpose-built for leadership in addition to its departmental expertise, otherwise, it wouldn't be put in charge. But that doesn't mean it can go anywhere and fill any role it wants just because it's qualified. It's still a synthetic, and being a synthetic brings with it certain restrictions.

[sdtwbaj]

What is leadership to you? How does a machine that does not understand emotion or mannerism effectively lead people? Shells are "loaded up" as a leadership unit by being given the advanced processes needed to understand people. This is hardware. It isn't simply downloaded. Baseline frames don't have this, which is why they aren't allowed to be heads.

 

As it's laid out, baselines are just that--a base. It can be made to do whatever one would want it to do, the only restriction being money. There isn't any reason that a baseline wouldn't be able to be given the necessary hardware for the task.

"A vendetta against IPCs" "IC Restrictions stiffle roleplay"

An important trait of our lore is the existence of oppression, racism and general inequality which drives conflict. IPCs are rightfully distrusted as they embody the idea of "has technology gone too far?" The skrell were fucking holocausted by synthetics, and almost all Artificial Intelligences in human space are lawed out of fear of a the same happening again. IPCs are some of the very few synthetics allowed to operate without a lawset and it's very hard for anyone to predict what that might lead to. There are already radical sects of the Synthetic Liberation Front and a large portion of our lore development was dedicated to their terrorist activities before the vaurca took center stage. Regardless of the hordes super space liberals who make up the player characters, many people would be uncomfortable working underneath a synthetic. This is why the shell requirement is made for the HoP and HoS, it's a way for synthetics to be eased into these positions with a friendly face.

Also, the idea that IC restrictions stiffle roleplay is a joke, heavy RP is defined by restrictions. We enforce occupation qualifications, naming conventions, and yes, we put restrictions which help to establish the lore and reinforce the races' place in the galaxy. Take for example the fact that Human and Skrell are the dominant forces in known space, they're both on good terms, and in human space only they are allowed to captain NanoTrasen Stations. Should we allow all races to hold every role because it's stiffling roleplay to deny everyone's fursona a captain slot? I would argue it makes for much more interesting roleplay to have a character denied something that they strive for than to simply let them have whatever they want.

 

Baselines don’t have to /not/ be purpose-built for leadership.

 

See, it's not a matter of what they're built for. An IPC can be built for leadership, and it should be if it's being placed into a position that requires it. If someone makes a synthetic Research Director, it's expected to be purpose-built for leadership in addition to its departmental expertise, otherwise, it wouldn't be put in charge. But that doesn't mean it can go anywhere and fill any role it wants just because it's qualified. It's still a synthetic, and being a synthetic brings with it certain restrictions.

 

Most restrictions are good, and do bring some role play in, that I won't deny. But there are some restrictions that are very well pointless, and don't lend much from a gameplay or roleplay perspective, and don't really have lore that justifies it too well. A shell is still an IPC, and frankly would probably be creepier than a normal IPC, given that it's a machine trying to replicate a human. If anything, that would make people MORE uncomfortable, lending itself to the whole "are organics being phased out?" "can machines copy us?" kind of thing.

As I see it, allowing baseline IPCs leads to either...

-extra conflict, and the roleplay surrounding the idea of a synthetic leader, and how that IPC deals with it.

-nothing new, since it isn't exactly a strong facade when you have IPCs with clearly robotic names hiding within a human form.

[Promanguy1223]

"A vendetta against IPCs" "IC Restrictions stiffle roleplay"

An important trait of our lore is the existence of oppression, racism and general inequality which drives conflict. IPCs are rightfully distrusted as they embody the idea of "has technology gone too far?" The skrell were fucking holocausted by synthetics, and almost all Artificial Intelligences in human space are lawed out of fear of a the same happening again. IPCs are some of the very few synthetics allowed to operate without a lawset and it's very hard for anyone to predict what that might lead to. There are already radical sects of the Synthetic Liberation Front and a large portion of our lore development was dedicated to their terrorist activities before the vaurca took center stage. Regardless of the hordes super space liberals who make up the player characters, many people would be uncomfortable working underneath a synthetic. This is why the shell requirement is made for the HoP and HoS, it's a way for synthetics to be eased into these positions with a friendly face.

Also, the idea that IC restrictions stiffle roleplay is a joke, heavy RP is defined by restrictions. We enforce occupation qualifications, naming conventions, and yes, we put restrictions which help to establish the lore and reinforce the races' place in the galaxy. Take for example the fact that Human and Skrell are the dominant forces in known space, they're both on good terms, and in human space only they are allowed to captain NanoTrasen Stations. Should we allow all races to hold every role because it's stiffling roleplay to deny everyone's fursona a captain slot? I would argue it makes for much more interesting roleplay to have a character denied something that they strive for than to simply let them have whatever they want.

 

Baselines don’t have to /not/ be purpose-built for leadership.

 

See, it's not a matter of what they're built for. An IPC can be built for leadership, and it should be if it's being placed into a position that requires it. If someone makes a synthetic Research Director, it's expected to be purpose-built for leadership in addition to its departmental expertise, otherwise, it wouldn't be put in charge. But that doesn't mean it can go anywhere and fill any role it wants just because it's qualified. It's still a synthetic, and being a synthetic brings with it certain restrictions.

 

I'm perfectly fine with all that was said here in this quote. I like the restriction, racism that it brings to Roleplay. It's the same reason I also wanted to be Shell HoS. I literally wanted to see Roleplay and how it will develop characters and relationships. I'm not for or against anything here. But to those players who's negativity can be seen in how they word their posts.. please have an open mind about things! It's your Character that hates IPCs not the player. It's your character that doesn't want Head IPCs. Not the players. Think about the Roleplay this stuff could create. That's all that I want to say. I won't be saying anymore on this thread.