Caveat: I have epic amounts of school crap to do, and haven't read all 5 or 6 pages of replies, because a lot of it seems focused on prp's and storytellers and people generally +1'ing at length. So some of this might have already been covered and I missed it in a quick skim. Apologies.
But now, for my (probably not mainstream) opinion on this:
@GirlCalledBlu said in Leadership, Spotlight, and PCs of Staffers:
- Staff should not play characters in positions of IC power; by default, they have OOC power because they are staffers, but abuse is always a concern when a Staffer has both OOC and IC power, and that IC power comes through their PC; if a Staff PC does end up in a leadership position, their character should be the minority (i.e. if they end up on the Senate Security Council, they should be easily outvoted by non-Staff PCs on the same council). In general though, Staff PCs should not hold IC positions of power.
I have the opposite opinion on this. I don't think that PCs should be the ones in positions of absolute authority. There are a variety of reasons for this, but at the end of the day, they really come down to two main points:
-
PCs are not the ones that are, for the most part, determining the game's direction. That's staff's job. Therefore, when you have your Top Tier Dude with a vision, and that vision doesn't jive with what Bob the Prince/HIerarch/Alpha/Whatever has in mind, you end up with tension, where the story/sphere/game as a whole would have been better served by having an NPC in that position that can actively serve to help direct things the way they should be going. Having to wrangle a player with some sort of authority into line with the story, or try and follow the authority-player's logic to the point where essentially staff's story is subservient to the player's desire, creates nightmares and headaches. Especially since everyone seems to insist that these people be elected in some sort of democratic fashion, rather than vetted through staff about who's going to be the actual best to serve in that position for story needs.
-
Staff are often putting in a lot of work on the game. They deserve all the same opportunities to advance their characters that everyone else does. If you don't trust the staffer's character with responsibility, then you don't actually trust the staffer with responsibility, which means... you probably shouldn't be playing there.
- Staff can play characters on their games, and these characters can have their own story arc that is significant to the character's development as long as this story arc does not violate point #1 or take a significant role in the metaplot.
Since I disagree with the first point here, I think that my response on this one is "Staff can play too, full stop."
- Staff can play their characters in metaplot events, as long as they are there to to participate solely as just another PC (i.e. "I'm here to blow shit up" or "I'm here to get pissant drunk and sleep under the table" [or any other variant]).
They should be able to participate as any other PC can, I think. They shouldn't be the one running the scene, of course, but they should have as much opportunity as others. All work and no real, enjoyable play makes for burnt out staffers that leave players without an actual staff.
- When a Staffer is on their PC, they are not operating as a Staffer, but as another PC on the game. There should be a clear boundary, and the PC bits should not be used as an arm of the Staffer. If the Staffer has something to say/do, they should say/do it on their wizbit.
It's the same person. And given the nature of transparency on who plays/does what on most games, this shouldn't really be necessary. I mean, it's not a major deal, but if someone says 'knock it off and stop being a dick', then you shouldn't have to resort to a wizbit to back that up. I mean, you -can-, sure. But either way, the message got sent.
Ultimately, I think the question here is... what role should Staff PCs have on a MUSH, and how does their role differ from the roles of non-Staff PCs?
Staffers are players who stepped up to the plate and are putting in the work to keep things running, for the most part, and as such they shouldn't be penalized for doing so. While whether they should be rewarded for such is a seperate question of gaming philosophy, I don't feel like penalizing the people who try and help make things better is ever going to move us in a positive direction.
Sorry bud.
