Roles, Rights, and Responsibilities of Faction Managers.

For clarification, the reason we have plot planning threads is so that FMs get their chance to raise concerns to GM plans and to keep communication lines open between all the GMs and the FMs. While this is not explicitly asking FMs for permission, the assumption is that if there's no FM objection in a reasonable timeframe, the GM is free to go about their plans.

Perhaps the above should be codified somehow.

Eistheid is awesome. He writes things I was just about to write, and writes them better.

I've been clamoring for a middle-ground for ...pretty much all this thread. I see extremes, I see more than just me being biased, and all I'm saying is that it's not just the FM that ought to be protected.

Eisthed We've never once stated they had to ask for every little decision, I'm not even sure where that came from. We've only asked that they convey major events that will effect the faction as a whole, before they do it. For example, if Fred had an Elysian plot, I would hope he'd come to us before he took half of the Elysian Celestial Navy and sent them flying at... Nepleslian Airspace with the intent to obliterate their Military and enslave all the manly men. or something. (Extremely Unlikely, and pretty Extreme Example but..)

Those are the type of things we want to discuss before they go through with it. We don't want to wake up one morning and find a GM has taken effectively half of our shit out into a suicide mission.

On the other hand, we don't want them asking us if they can allow a character to go out and poop on the deck or something either.

Extreme Examples, I know, but my point is still there.

And Fred, thats just it, the GMs are -already- protected, you don't seem to notice that. The FM's are the only one without -any- control over anything.

@Fred I'll be the first to admit I do not have a perfect understanding of the things that happened in Lor's past but you're trying to pin all the blame on Doc having so much power. But from what I read of your own statement, yeah if Doc talked it out that wouldn't have happened. But also it sounds like it wouldn't have happened if you, not the FM, didn't try to have an entire cast of many thousands do something without the FM's consent. I might be wrong about that but based on your post that's what it sounds like.

Also Fred you are being rather hypocritical you are saying one case of an FM abusing power makes this something no one should have. But what about all the GMs that have abused their freedom and done harm to factions and the setting by abusing that? Hmm? Do those single instances have no weight? And I know plenty of FMs who put in -more- work then GMs. Cause most of the FMs are not only FMs but they GM for other factions and even their own. How can you sit there and say GMs do more when a lot of our FMs are pulling double duty?

And as everyone has said. We're not talking about you losing your creative freedom. If anything we're talking about building an environment where trust like Wes has of you can be forged with less risk to the FM so they're more willing to do it.

@Eistheid you are actually incorrect. We are not talking about Gms having to ask for -everything-. The main point of argument is that FMs have the -ability- to make things uncannon if they see that it does not fit. This would be a step taken -after- something is done. Meaning the GMs don't have to ask for every little plot they run. This is a safety to actually make it so GM's -don't- have to ask. It means the GM can do their plot without getting every little thing approved, and as long as the plot doesn't do something the FM feels unnecessarily harms the faction it sticks.

The counter to that, Wes, is the sheer number of GMs who either don't update their threads at all, or don't provide anywhere the detail that would be needed for that to actually work for what you're thinking. If you say you're going to have some pirates attacking in your plot, am I supposed to somehow infer that one of them will magically have Elysian military grade weapons? And do GMs REALLY want to waste even more time putting that kind of detail in there? That seems like it would be even more time intensive and restrictive on GM creativity and freedom than just contacting the FMs would be.

And Eistheid, you're not reading my posts very well if you think I'm advocating "extreme" measures. My response, every time, has been cooperation and restricted control, not godhood for FMs.

And we're going to have to leave it there. This topic's been open for a good three days now and everyone interested seems to have their chance to make their points and I don't want to see anyone get stressed out repeating themselves. So I'm going to lock the topic until I'm able to re-read the feedback (possibly multiple times) and work on integrating it into the official site rules.

There's been some amazing points raised and I will have a lot to think about as I draft the combined version of the FM rules, which I will also get feedback on afterward. My hope is to make something that compromises so that we strike a good balance between FM control and GM flexibility. I'm glad the site as a whole got to participate on this, and I'm really pleased with the calm and intelligent discussion we had about this and that I got to see perspectives from multiple viewpoints. Thank you for participating and I'll try to get the draft up as soon as possible, which will probably be next week, since I'm out for a convention this weekend to geek out and to plug the site.

Thanks,

--Wes

Okay, here's my suggestion. I know it still needs a lot of work but I think it covers the essentials: https://wiki.stararmy.com/doku.php?id=guide:faction_rights

The thread is now re-open for discussion and suggestions.

Nice, while not as detailed as I would like it to be... Its really well done.

Though, I think on the subject of a Faction Leader leaving, Banned, or Inactive, it should pass to the Co-FM with the longest experience in handling the Faction itself, cause popular vote could end up with someone who doesn't know what they're doing, or doesn't have the original view of the faction in mind.

Also if I may ask, what exactly is a setting manager? I'm not 100% Clear on this terminology.

I would say the first step of suggestions would be the parts where it says "the plot can be made non-canon", the process for doing so on each instance should be made clear. Cause only the last one says that it's an appeal to setting manager. So to me who is on FMs side, that means the rest aren't Setting manager appeals. But to someone else that might mean they're all setting manager appeals. So it should probably be cleared up so everyone is on the same page.

Good point, Semjax. I've updated it based on your feedback.

A setting manager is the person who controls what is and isn't canon in the setting. That's me. "The buck stops here."

Syaoran: Making things canon or not canon is the right of the setting manager. When it says "may be marked as non-canon" that means I have to make a judgement call on whether or not I should allow the RP to be canon. The system is designed to be flexible and allow for some GM mistakes. Occasionally some violations by GMs could be tolerated for being really great RP or for being too minor to really matter.

I get that, I'm just saying it needed to be cleared up on the page itself of who is making it non-canon and the steps taken to do such. For the sake of clarity.

Updated again with a notes section.

@Wes - it's probably been an annoyance for you, but perhaps some sort of 'standard procedure' should be discussed when there's more than one faction involved? Though I don't think I'm doing anything inappropriate, I'm aware the unknowns of my own plot are likely making you uncomfortable. Throwing ideas out, perhaps in addition to GMs telling what's happening or will happen, a statement of goals or what each party desires would help? That way, what an FM wants and what a GM wants are more clearly on the table so they can discuss things. Listing this out as a quick and easy procedure to fill out may help, or just be annoying though.

Can you give me an example I can incorporate?

Well, we could try having a checklist of things to address. Basically one consisting of the things every FM would worry about when their faction is being interacted with from the outside? A few key ones for certain, and probably as a courtesy rather than any sort of mandate; if an FM is worried, they're always free to ask anyways. Maybe what faction X is doing to faction Y and vice versa? Mention if any tech is being exchanged in one form or another? Ask how does the GM wish to portray the factions during the interaction? Plot goals/GM intent for the interaction?

I'm just tossing ideas out and seeing what sticks; I know it's a concern, but am not entirely sure what would work and what wouldn't.

This hasn't been touched upon in a little bit, so sorry if bringing it back up is an issue, however Cadet makes a good point. A list of situations that would give an idea of what FMs consider important and require their attention would be nice. A second list of things that don't necessarily need FM contact would also help. It would give an idea of what GMs do or do not need approval for which would speed up the process and reduce work since even if an FM responds with "Oh it isn't an issue." Depending on schedules it could still take a couple of days to get a response.

So maybe things like: The use of military units, research facilities, outposts, characters, civilian populations, etc.

I'm not an FM so I can't predict where the sticking points would be, but a point of reference would help present and future GMs know what they should contact the FM about... Could also in the same place encourage that if the GM is unsure they should ask anyway.

For clarification, I'm not saying this is a perfect idea. Merely proposing it as a possible tool.

I agree with you there, but I'm not sure how that would be worked into the rules.

A supplementary section spelling those things out, below the R&R, seems prudent. Better yet, if FMs have different priorities, link then from the R&R page.

Given the recent thread about the Nepleslian FM position, it occurs to me that every other active faction on the site has an FM who is also a GM, and that's the norm. Should we expect FMs to run a plot? Should we require a certain minimum of activity on Star Army, other than non-zero?

Thank you for your feedback.

I believe we've already had this discussion, a majority of the people were heavily in favor of the FM also being a GM, I to am in favor of this, cause if an FM can't run his own faction's plot, he shouldn't expect other people to want to run a plot in his faction.