Community Discussion: Multiple jobs - Job hopping - Realism vs Gameplay

[Scheveningen]

I don't think making an ad-hominem and accusing people who want to job hop of a lack of flexibility makes for a very good argument, first of all, and you are heavily simplifying the reasons why people would want to "job-hop" by simply saying "they're not creative or flexible enough to make more characters."

 

Putting focus on discrediting their stance by showing the faults not only in their personal logic but also in the method they conduct things is not ad hominem. Possessing very few characters shows a lack of desire to branch out to more unfamiliar character concepts, true or not true? A lack of variation in differing personality between characters shows a lack of distinct individuality from one another, the only difference inevitably being cosmetic appearance, right or not? All too often, people cry (as in, not bawling their tears out, and rather in the sense of how it is used in the term 'outcry') "ad hominem" when their debate opponent says something mean-spirited or too frank while still failing to see the opposing arguments so as to avoid addressing the main points argued. Ad hominem by its definition is too easy to abuse modern-day given the nature of how outrage culture works and how easy it is to claim offense in a debate. While strange, it is ever so fascinating how most people who cry ad hominem, unlike most people, are unable to brush off "potentially offensive" comments because they care too much about ad hominem attacks in the first place, especially on the behalf of others. It's toxic rhetoric, so whatever.

 

That's not to say you should play the same character for every role, I'm just saying that if the skill-gap is reasonable there should be no reason to heavily restrict it.

 

I'm lacking necessary context to properly argue this individual case with you. You didn't happen to say what job your character was and what two jobs they hop between. Hopping between some service department jobs isn't necessarily unreasonable as a culinary/botanical dual-schooling wouldn't be a terrible thought. Cross-class specialties that have little to zero relation (such as the distinction between engineering and medical, or cargo and security, or research and non-RD command) would generally be pushing the envelope.

Skrell have an amount of leeway on other characters (save for IPCs, but IPCs get a bit of an exception) given the virtue of being able to be almost a hundred years older than humans, not to mention a different culture of vocational or academic studies to get where they need to be apart from humans. IPCs also get this leeway by simply sticking the equivalent USB-sized stick into a bot before the start of the shift and they specialize in a few useful things relevant to their job to a degree that surpasses humanoid capability on another virtue of being a synthetic. These are some particular exceptions. TL;DR on this note, Skrell can learn more things on a broader scale (or a deeper scale, whichever works as long as it's reasonable) whereas IPCs function from an advanced to an expert or even a master level for some tasks related to their field. If they aren't in security, however, the reasonable expectation is that they have no combat programming whatsoever so as to keep them fair and balanced so as to not automagically summon Advanced Krav Maga in a tight spot.

Humanoids (Humans, Tajarans, Unathi) that don't include Skrell are largely the subject of this discussion given they have no particular distinctions when it comes to skill/knowledge retention nuance. This is largely what the subject is about. The species with knowledge retention limitations must keep those limitations because a balanced degree of competence is what makes interesting characters. Characters work like the inverse of finding value in diamonds, less flaws often means less inherent value as a character. It is important to give characters their flaws in addition to their strengths, otherwise they're faultless Mary Sues and subject to bad character design.

 

Having the HoP give bartender/ a volunteer title would solve the job taking issue, the pay gap issue, and the realism issue, as it would be exactly what it is on the tin: a volunteer hobby, not a career shift or a job-hop.

 

This is where I must disagree again. What is the point of hiring a paid bartender if there are individuals who are willing forego their contract to essentially perform free labor for the station? I would say this is a kind of power creep, but it's difficult to find a proper term for it.

It's certainly not as terrible as job-hopping, but the purpose inevitably remains the same and presents the same issue. The individual still drives to do the job they are technically not primarily employed for to begin with, when they are off the job, especially.

My characters have hobbies too. I have hobbies other than SS13. I do them at home. I like cooking, so I cook at home. My characters also can cook, but they cook at home. I used to work at a bar and grill, I was effectively a shift manager. If I was Off the Job I was NEVER meant to be cooking anything, because that would bear the risk of cross-contamination which even with my rank in the chain of command would still get me potentially fired if the owner saw me doing that. Following kitchen procedure was more important than risking my job -- or worse, a contamination risk, because I enjoyed making smoked ham-grilled cheese sandwiches. It didn't matter if I liked to cook. If I wasn't on the clock meant to be cooking, I was not to be cooking at all.

Every single food service establishment has this policy. I really don't see why this should be any different.

 

And they would not be "active employees" either, just volunteer helpers. They would not be on the payroll or anything of the sort, which is more than reasonable if you ask me.

 

More like a complete scam if you ask me. Even full-time soup kitchen staff get paid. No sane being would ever do this.

[driecg36]

Putting focus on discrediting their stance by showing the faults not only in their personal logic but also in the method they conduct things is not ad hominem. Possessing very few characters shows a lack of desire to branch out to more unfamiliar character concepts, true or not true? A lack of variation in differing personality between characters shows a lack of distinct individuality from one another, the only difference inevitably being cosmetic appearance, right or not? All too often, people cry (as in, not bawling their tears out, and rather in the sense of how it is used in the term 'outcry') "ad hominem" when their debate opponent says something mean-spirited or too frank while still failing to see the opposing arguments so as to avoid addressing the main points argued. Ad hominem by its definition is too easy to abuse modern-day given the nature of how outrage culture works and how easy it is to claim offense in a debate. While strange, it is ever so fascinating how most people who cry ad hominem, unlike most people, are unable to brush off "potentially offensive" comments because they care too much about ad hominem attacks in the first place, especially on the behalf of others. It's toxic rhetoric, so whatever.

 

I was not the one you were targeting, and I disagree with having only one or two characters, so the argument of outrage culture is rather irrelevant to me. I was just using the term's literal definition: an attack against the person, not their argument. Had you used in a way that was of more value than "We shouldn't cater to the type of person," I would not have brought it up. I more so took issue with you implying all people in favor of "job-hopping" were people who had no flexibility and no creativity, and when you consider that that is false, it's obvious it was simply an attempt at discrediting the opinions of those you disagree with.

I can almost guarantee you will disagree with my personal case (since, not to be pretentious, I think I am the immediate cause of this whole fiasco), and upon seeing the arguments in this thread, I can see why you would. Honestly, I also agree that simply switching to another job in another department is poor form, and I have agreed to not do it again.

I would like to say that the argument of power-gaming is moot unless the person specifically powergames with it, which would evidently not be in this gray area we're arguing over. If a HoS were to pick say, bartender, and then run around with his shotgun, demand access, and valid hunt, that would be a problem. However, how would a HoS mixing drinks in the break room be considered powergaming, if it makes sense with their character? It gives them no edge, and once again, isn't unrealistic. People know how to mix drinks and cook food on top of regular careers.

And I also partially disagree with your argument of flaws. I agree, flaws must be present in a character to make them believable and interesting, but it's not like a point based system where the character with the most flaws (blind, deaf, quadruple amputee tajara transgendered muslim woman that only speaks sign language would be a top tier character if that were so) is the best. That's asinine, and I don't think you were going for that point, but you did forget to make the distinction that flaws need to be interesting and believable in themselves as well. My character, Leonce, has flaws. He's not ultra robust (mostly my fault), a little hot headed, and very stubborn. He also tries very hard to avoid lethal force, and if under too much pressure he snaps. He also happens to know bartending, because he wants to own a bar after he retires. It may not be the most interesting character, but it's a believable one and most certainly not a mary sue.

However, I think the best point you've made so far is company policy. I can definitely see why NT would act the very same way as your bar and grill does when it comes to work. I agree that that would be a problem that an IRL NT would take issue with. However, and I hate to do this, I have to play the "Gameplay vs. Realism" card here. There are a COLOSSAL amount of things that go on station that no company would EVER allow in the real world, but are allowed in game for the sake of gameplay and because of the fact that people effectively exist only on the station in 2-4 hour shifts, and then disappear for the rest of the time. If exceptions are made for these other things, why not for this as well? What's more interesting; a character that says they cook/bartend at home, and has a note in their employment records that noone ever reads, or a character that actually bartends every once in a while? I think the answer is pretty obvious.

And for the scam thing, the visitors would not be getting paid anyways since they are on leave. They aren't full-time soup kitchen workers, they are PART TIME VOLUNTEERS. They make their money from their main job, and work their hobby job because they enjoy said work, not because they want money. The pay difference actually works in the favor of the job hoppers here, since heads would have enough of a bank account (and more than enough reason to take a shift off every so often) to afford to do this.

And for the reasons you stated above, NT would not replace their trained, certified bartenders and chefs for volunteers, because the latter simply are not only vastly less qualified, but also not nearly as available as they work their main job.

[Scheveningen]

Much as I enjoy the back and forth of paragraphs, regular characters that are played in their dedicated role are arguably more interesting than job-hopped characters, considering there's more room for character development with just maybe 3 different characters played in 3 rounds compared to just 1 character back to back to back.

You don't come to work as a visitor to work. You come to visit and enjoy the NT facilities. Chair RP role, primarily, but great for chilling out in the same respect and having zero responsibility.

Kitchen volunteers shouldn't be done without there being a vacancy in the kitchen, obviously. The moment a real cook steps in they need to step down, hobby or not. Visitors shouldn't be expecting a whole lot from a role that isn't on the clock to begin with.

Here's how I feel currently.

Unopposed: Taking a jobs within the department, assuming you are qualified. Detective to Officer. Chef to Bartender. Cargo Tech and Miner.

Strongly Opposed: Taking jobs with significant pay-gaps. Head of Security to Bartender. Warden to Cargo Technician.

Unopposed with special exceptions:* Taking jobs across departments due to qualifications. Surgeon to Xenobiologist. Officer to Paramedic.

*Surgeon/xenobiologist split makes sense due to the presence of anatomy effectively becoming a required xenoanatomy course in addition to the standard anatomy academia, since surgeons end up being in the chests of other species. Officer/paramedic split also explained earlier in the thread as well. Miner/engineer is touchy but could potentially work out if the miner happens to be a drill tech that handles engineering(ish) specifications of mining and happens to be familiar with engineering nuances as a result of it. Others require justifiable relation to one another to even work out in terms of relevance.

[Faris]

Staff have compiled all views, both on this thread and other discussions. We're currently going to discuss it and have a set in stone stance hopefully soon.

If you have anything further to add, now is the time.

[Dreamix]

I'm not really playing the game to much anymore, but I do have something to add.

One, it's kinda bad/dickish to hop departments like this (bartender-captain, for example). There could be a player who specifically created a bartender character to mix drinks and talk with people about their problems, like a true professional. *Or* a player with his captain who is allegedly a bartending hobbyist, and really just wants to goof around with his meta-buddies.

Two, the pay gap is an issue. It's not like captains are 20 year olds so live in their parent's basement. They have big apartments and all kinds of shit to pay - employing themselves in an extremely low paying job won't pay the bills. Also, if a captain sees that his job on NSS Aurora is taken, he gets assigned to NSS Whatever or NSS Autilus. There are lots of other stations that NanoTrasen operates, and characters commute from Biesel or CC or wherever anyway. Working with the same people on Aurora is not an argument, as characters change every shift.

[Faris]

Locking as a decision has been made.