- Jan 8, 2023
- 572
- 137
- 111
What does this suggestion change/add/remove:
Changing:
to
1.17 Position Limits: Recommendations for Balance and Integrity
To help everyone have a better experience, whether you're in a leadership role, trying something new, or just exploring what the Foundation has to offer. These guidelines are intended to ensure fairness, focus, and immersion across the board.
Trying to do everything at once often results in doing nothing well. These limits help ensure you're not overwhelmed and that others also get a chance to participate.
Leadership Role Recommendation
It is recommended that you hold only one leadership position at a time. Leadership positions include:
Why?
Leadership roles are demanding. You are expected to lead by example, guide others, and manage both in-character and out-of-character responsibilities. Taking on multiple high-level roles makes it harder to be present, reliable, and effective. When too many players spread themselves across leadership, it can lead to inactivity, missed responsibilities, and a lack of direction for the teams they oversee.
Focusing on one leadership role allows you to perform better and gives others the opportunity to step up and contribute.
Server-Specific Role Suggestion
It is recommended that you choose to hold whitelisted and MTF positions on either SCP-RP USA or SCP-RP UK, but not both.
Why?
Each server operates differently in terms of leadership, events, and community. Splitting your attention between both often leads to one side being neglected. Committing to a single server allows for deeper engagement and better roleplay without confusion or burnout.
One MTF Group Rule
You should only be part of one MTF group, regardless of region or server.
Why?
MTF groups rely on consistent communication, loyalty, and coordination. Being in multiple groups creates confusion, and it can also lead to metagaming, where information is unintentionally or intentionally shared between groups. Staying in one unit supports teamwork, trust, and long-term development within that group.
GOI Role Limit
You should only be involved with one Group of Interest (GOI) at a time. These include the Foundation, Chaos Insurgency, or Global Occult Coalition (GOC).
Why?
GOIs are often in conflict with each other. Playing on both sides can lead to bias, confusion, and accidental info leaks. This harms the realism and balance of the server. Choosing one group helps you stay focused and fully immerse in that group’s purpose and goals.
Clearance-Level Position Limits
To prevent burnout and ensure effective leadership, the following limits are suggested:
Why?
High-clearance roles are meant to lead, guide, and manage. Holding too many at once leads to underperformance or inactivity. These limits help you stay engaged, avoid burnout, and keep the leadership structure healthy. They also create space for new players to rise through the ranks and strengthen the community.
Role compatibility logistics:
Players may not hold roles that are unrealistic or conflicting in lore, authority, or operational function. Examples include, but are not limited to:
Some roles simply don’t make sense together. Being in both the Ethics Committee and Alpha-1, or serving as an Overseer Assistant while also being a Ethics Assistant, breaks the chain of command and damages immersion. These roles have conflicting duties, loyalties, and expectations.
From a character standpoint, it also confuses who your character is and what they stand for. You can’t realistically be both a overseer assistant and a ethics assistant. It weakens your story and makes it harder for others to take your role seriously.
This rule helps keep character lore consistent and aligned with server lore. It reduces confusion, keeps responsibilities clear, and helps you build a focused, believable character path that other players can respect and engage with.
These recommendations are not meant to restrict you but to help everyone build a strong, enjoyable, and fair environment. By focusing on what matters most to you and performing that role well, you can make a real impact on your department, your server, and your story.
Has something similar been suggested before? If so, why is your suggestion different?:
I don't believe something to this caliber was suggested, perhaps individual restrictions.
Possible Positives of the suggestion (At least 2):
Possible Negatives of the suggestion:
Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:
This suggestion fosters a better quality of life in-game through sustainability, immersion and structure as it promotes intentionality that is recognized rather than relied upon forced measures. This gives the opportunity for education through understanding to evolve into a culture of accountability for the respect of the departments and factions available. The benefits over time, the quality of life for leadership opportunities/quality, community longevity and roleplay immersion, far outweigh the negatives. With proper staff intervention through discussion, this adjustment will vastly improve integrity and function for this server environment over time.
It's critical to understand that staff are not here to tell players who can and cannot play what; staff are here to maintain a balance across all players in an ecology. They work best when intervening to help guide where creative flares need assistance, emphasis or leadership; they do not seek to overly control anything. Instead they seek to ensure fairness across access and department activity. Giving access to too many different regions encourages stagnation, perceived favoritism and lack of activity which subsequently creates passive aggression with "this is my side gig."
The issue exists because any department or faction comes from real-life expectations that function like jobs. There is intended structure in consistency, leadership presence, etc. Hence why finding level of effort is needed with those who do not possess the level of effort required damages departments and people who solely rely on them. Having strict limitations makes sense. It does not stray away from creativity; it protects the quality of life for all involved so that people can successfully roleplay in any capacity they choose. It's the responsibility of department leaders to maintain control and consistency within their ranks; this is acknowledged by many however many note that responsibility thresholds prevent consistency should all members use their time effectively.
There is absolutely no reason that limits on how many positions someone can take should easily be placed because it does not limit how much time someone has in-game or where they can apply themselves within their time; limits prevent forced access to all without reliability of focused qualities rendering limited wealth in opportunity. This way, what someone can do works in their favor as well as whatever departments rely on them because time in game will be well utilized.
Changing:
to
1.17 Position Limits: Recommendations for Balance and Integrity
To help everyone have a better experience, whether you're in a leadership role, trying something new, or just exploring what the Foundation has to offer. These guidelines are intended to ensure fairness, focus, and immersion across the board.
Trying to do everything at once often results in doing nothing well. These limits help ensure you're not overwhelmed and that others also get a chance to participate.
Leadership Role Recommendation
It is recommended that you hold only one leadership position at a time. Leadership positions include:
- O5 Council
- Ethics Committee
- Site Administration (Director, Manager, Advisor)
- Department Directors and Chiefs
- DEA Managers
- ISD Commissioners
- MTF, GOC, or CI Commanding Officers at the ranks of LT (Foundation), CPT (GOC), or BCOM+ (CI)
Why?
Leadership roles are demanding. You are expected to lead by example, guide others, and manage both in-character and out-of-character responsibilities. Taking on multiple high-level roles makes it harder to be present, reliable, and effective. When too many players spread themselves across leadership, it can lead to inactivity, missed responsibilities, and a lack of direction for the teams they oversee.
Focusing on one leadership role allows you to perform better and gives others the opportunity to step up and contribute.
Server-Specific Role Suggestion
It is recommended that you choose to hold whitelisted and MTF positions on either SCP-RP USA or SCP-RP UK, but not both.
Why?
Each server operates differently in terms of leadership, events, and community. Splitting your attention between both often leads to one side being neglected. Committing to a single server allows for deeper engagement and better roleplay without confusion or burnout.
One MTF Group Rule
You should only be part of one MTF group, regardless of region or server.
Why?
MTF groups rely on consistent communication, loyalty, and coordination. Being in multiple groups creates confusion, and it can also lead to metagaming, where information is unintentionally or intentionally shared between groups. Staying in one unit supports teamwork, trust, and long-term development within that group.
GOI Role Limit
You should only be involved with one Group of Interest (GOI) at a time. These include the Foundation, Chaos Insurgency, or Global Occult Coalition (GOC).
Why?
GOIs are often in conflict with each other. Playing on both sides can lead to bias, confusion, and accidental info leaks. This harms the realism and balance of the server. Choosing one group helps you stay focused and fully immerse in that group’s purpose and goals.
Clearance-Level Position Limits
To prevent burnout and ensure effective leadership, the following limits are suggested:
- You may hold up to two Junior Clearance Level 4 (Jr. CL4) positions
- Or one Clearance Level 5 (CL5) and one Clearance Level 4 (CL4) position
- Or one Senior Clearance Level 4 (Sr. CL4) and one Junior Clearance Level 4 (Jr. CL4)
Why?
High-clearance roles are meant to lead, guide, and manage. Holding too many at once leads to underperformance or inactivity. These limits help you stay engaged, avoid burnout, and keep the leadership structure healthy. They also create space for new players to rise through the ranks and strengthen the community.
Role compatibility logistics:
Players may not hold roles that are unrealistic or conflicting in lore, authority, or operational function. Examples include, but are not limited to:
- Ethics Committee and MTF Alpha-1
- Overseer Assistant and Ethics Assistant
- Any combination where confidentiality, allegiance, or operational jurisdiction would logically conflict with each character under the same player
Some roles simply don’t make sense together. Being in both the Ethics Committee and Alpha-1, or serving as an Overseer Assistant while also being a Ethics Assistant, breaks the chain of command and damages immersion. These roles have conflicting duties, loyalties, and expectations.
From a character standpoint, it also confuses who your character is and what they stand for. You can’t realistically be both a overseer assistant and a ethics assistant. It weakens your story and makes it harder for others to take your role seriously.
This rule helps keep character lore consistent and aligned with server lore. It reduces confusion, keeps responsibilities clear, and helps you build a focused, believable character path that other players can respect and engage with.
These recommendations are not meant to restrict you but to help everyone build a strong, enjoyable, and fair environment. By focusing on what matters most to you and performing that role well, you can make a real impact on your department, your server, and your story.
Has something similar been suggested before? If so, why is your suggestion different?:
I don't believe something to this caliber was suggested, perhaps individual restrictions.
Possible Positives of the suggestion (At least 2):
- Promotes stronger, more accountable leadership as people are expected to fill roles they can adequately support. This means that guidance, direction, and delegation to subordinates become more coherent.
- Reduces administrative stress for department leaders and command staff as reduced confusion/chaos comes from less individuals attempting to fill multiple high-stress roles. This means reduced absenteeism, easier communication and support for department dynamic
- Increases longevity and community involvement for a server as whitelisted leadership roles and opportunities are consistently available. This reduces an overabundance of people monopolizing powerful positions, giving newer or more highly involved players a better chance to help shape the future of the server. It should not be and is not always the leadership's direct intention for low registered whitelist holders for their designated group, more nuanced content will have a slim target audience while other do not.
Possible Negatives of the suggestion:
- Some players may feel that these suggestions limit their ability to explore different roles and engage across different regions/factions; this is untrue as those who are still unsure of their investments should not delay the progression of others or diminish the professionalism and reputation of a department or regiment due to subpar focus or general disinterest in direction. For those who are offended by this suggestion, understand that a disinterested focus for a group or groups that come from creativity and passion are not what this suggestion is about as this undermines what makes that group or groups appealing and interesting.
- The limitation enforcement relies on continued vigilance and self-policing which may not exist without staff accompaniment; this is untrue as this already exists. Many department leaders note that when their members treat their department opportunity as a secondary or tertiary focus, it complicates expectations. It's not up to the leadership to have to monitor and account for those who lack focus. A stabilizing environment demands intentionality so if we want to maintain a sense of reality and stability for serious roleplay, we must acknowledge clear decisions that must be made and stand by.
Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:
This suggestion fosters a better quality of life in-game through sustainability, immersion and structure as it promotes intentionality that is recognized rather than relied upon forced measures. This gives the opportunity for education through understanding to evolve into a culture of accountability for the respect of the departments and factions available. The benefits over time, the quality of life for leadership opportunities/quality, community longevity and roleplay immersion, far outweigh the negatives. With proper staff intervention through discussion, this adjustment will vastly improve integrity and function for this server environment over time.
It's critical to understand that staff are not here to tell players who can and cannot play what; staff are here to maintain a balance across all players in an ecology. They work best when intervening to help guide where creative flares need assistance, emphasis or leadership; they do not seek to overly control anything. Instead they seek to ensure fairness across access and department activity. Giving access to too many different regions encourages stagnation, perceived favoritism and lack of activity which subsequently creates passive aggression with "this is my side gig."
The issue exists because any department or faction comes from real-life expectations that function like jobs. There is intended structure in consistency, leadership presence, etc. Hence why finding level of effort is needed with those who do not possess the level of effort required damages departments and people who solely rely on them. Having strict limitations makes sense. It does not stray away from creativity; it protects the quality of life for all involved so that people can successfully roleplay in any capacity they choose. It's the responsibility of department leaders to maintain control and consistency within their ranks; this is acknowledged by many however many note that responsibility thresholds prevent consistency should all members use their time effectively.
There is absolutely no reason that limits on how many positions someone can take should easily be placed because it does not limit how much time someone has in-game or where they can apply themselves within their time; limits prevent forced access to all without reliability of focused qualities rendering limited wealth in opportunity. This way, what someone can do works in their favor as well as whatever departments rely on them because time in game will be well utilized.
Administrator
SCP-RP Staff
Event Team
Donator
