ben10083 Posted March 19, 2018 Posted March 19, 2018 Ok have a seat let me set the stage... A person commonly plays a cyborg named C.A.R.L (not an actual person, just made it up) and becomes well known OOCly The Person eventually gets a IPC white-list accepted and changes C.A.R.L from a awesome cyborg to a IPC, for little reason. Ok with that lame example aside, the point I am trying to get at is that some people are using the cyborg role as "training wheels" for IPC, and when they get their IPC white-list accepted they make their cyborg a IPC for no reason RP wise (why would NanoTrasen need to upgrade their cyborg to a IPC that requires payment?). Overall I have a way to fix this; Cyborgs are not permitted to be changed into a IPC character, they are to remain a cyborg. This will encourage more creativity with IPC characters rather than "I am a cyborg you know that is now a IPC." and will allow for new characters, with new quirks and backgrounds.
Butterrobber202 Posted March 19, 2018 Posted March 19, 2018 Yeah, in no way would NT let their cyborgs 'go free' and be IPCs
kyres1 Posted March 19, 2018 Posted March 19, 2018 This has been something people have been complaining about for a while now, but the biggest issue with it is the fact that many very old IPC characters were originally stationbounds. Changing this in any way essentially asks for those people to change their entire backstory, and reasonably would needlessly upset them. Me and Cake are working on way for this to make at least some sense, but adding this as a rule when it hasn't been for years is sure to cause more trouble than it is worth in my opinion.
Hazrond Posted March 19, 2018 Posted March 19, 2018 The difference I believe, is that usually those characters aren’t just “let free” but are bought from the corporation by engineers and others that they have worked with closely. While it may be a bit cheesy I wouldn’t call that grounds for a ban.
Scheveningen Posted March 19, 2018 Posted March 19, 2018 Cyborgs: Nah. They are an MMI. It makes no sense. Organic processor hooked up to machine hardware. Androids: Plausible. Very plausible, they are positronic. Robots: Nah. They are actual robotic processors. They are meant to be simpler than androids fluff-wise.
kyres1 Posted March 19, 2018 Posted March 19, 2018 To clarify ; "cyborg" in this circumstance I had assumed was just a general reference to station bounds (namely androids). If you mean literal cyborgs turning into IPCs, no. That is a case where you would ahelp, as an organic "processor hooked up to a machine" as Schev put it makes zero sense to suddenly become a positronic.
Butterrobber202 Posted March 19, 2018 Posted March 19, 2018 This has been something people have been complaining about for a while now, but the biggest issue with it is the fact that many very old IPC characters were originally stationbounds. Changing this in any way essentially asks for those people to change their entire backstory, and reasonably would needlessly upset them. Me and Cake are working on way for this to make at least some sense, but adding this as a rule when it hasn't been for years is sure to cause more trouble than it is worth in my opinion. Make it a new rule starting now to prevent any more buildup?
ben10083 Posted March 19, 2018 Author Posted March 19, 2018 yeah maybe just have a "official" NanoTrasen announcement saying how NanoTrasen will no longer permit cyborg to IPC upgrades, that or just say that station bounds can no longer change to IPCs, but people who already did so are fine.
kyres1 Posted March 19, 2018 Posted March 19, 2018 Make it a new rule starting now to prevent any more buildup? It'd be difficult to do it in a way that makes any sense, especially considering the fact that we're working on a way to rationalize it rather than completely remove the possibility.
Faris Posted March 19, 2018 Posted March 19, 2018 Not adding this as a rule. Kyres cited that the synth lore team is working on reforming this aspect of the lore to be more fitting and I won't overrule them in this case by adding a rule that would more or less infringe on their work. Voting for dismissal.
LordBalkara Posted March 19, 2018 Posted March 19, 2018 Can't IPCs be owned anyway? There's nothing really stopping droid-to-IPC chars from still being NT owned.
Eve Posted March 19, 2018 Posted March 19, 2018 Who cares, at this point? Android-to-IPC can provide RP and backstory for a characcter, and be somewhat entertaining, and I remember seeing pAI to IPC also being handled somewhat well. Most Cyborgs who say that they 'are transformed' into IPCs don't make a huge deal out of it anyways.
Azande Posted March 19, 2018 Posted March 19, 2018 Androids and AIs have always had a buy out option. We do not have IPCs with MMIs, any character that went from Borg to IPC has retconned their cyborg existence.
CakeIsOssim Posted March 22, 2018 Posted March 22, 2018 Lots of what I wanted to say have already been said. We're working (and have pretty much finished at this point) to reform policies on bound androids becoming IPCs. Voting for dismissal.
Bauser Posted March 22, 2018 Posted March 22, 2018 A hack solution to this would be to say that any in-game canon that a cyborg character made is erased/reset when they become an IPC. So people act like they haven't met them before, etc. Because making your cyborg character into an IPC is functionally no different from erasing your cyborg and making a "new" character who just happens to have the same quirks and label on it... This respects the progress that has been made by current IPCs that used to be cyborgs, and it solves the lore problem of future cyborg-IPC conversions by striking their cyborg history from canon.
Recommended Posts