So are IDs ooRP or inRP?

[Big Bison Bessie]

I always thought it was odd that almost all bounty hunting has a requirement to scan and hand over a copy of the target ID, doing so inRP as part of the claim, when the ID is ooRP

---

☆The Ballad of Bessie Bishop☆ | ☆Elizabeth Bishop LPI Records☆ | ☆Feedback☆

[Tenshi]

https://discoverygc.com/forums/showthrea...tid=206713

Did you read the post?

did you read the comment above me that asks if intel ID's get the same protection?

The post you're hinting is not in the server rules w*man, idk why you're giving me that as a response to a question about stuff clearly lacking from the <Server Rules>

Staff have been discussing the next stage of IFF reform for the last few weeks to address this issue, so we may be able to provide a full update soon.

I'm also planning on writing up a Library post on intercolonial law, so the Boorman Treaty would be covered in that too.

Very good stuff, the sooner both of those come the better, especially with terms like the Boorman Treaty being mentioned inRP without them existing in the forums.

For players like you and @"Kai Siegfried" who have never played the campaign, obviously you're going to miss out on a lot of stuff.

I'll have you know I played the campaign again after like 10+ years literally a few weeks ago!!!
And I still don't remember where Boorman Treaty is even mentioned lmao


I won't reply to anything specific after that as basically every post is making the same points, and those are that IDs are mostly inRP but it's good if people don't refer to them as inRP as that enhances roleplay and allows people to roleplay their IFF and do their undercover stuff (doesn't only apply to Wilds). The funny part is that I, too, agree with that. I don't think IDs should be inRP but at the same time I don't think this matter should just come down to "what makes sense" and what is immersive for roleplay but instead be cleared out in the server rules. It's a pretty important

Hemlocke very nicely summed up my thoughts in his second post.

And then there's Bessie's post which makes a lot of sense, doesn't it? If we're supposed to be treating people by what their IFF is then shouldn't bounties also be based on IFF and not ID? Shouldnt /bs print out the IFF rather than the ID? And at the same time, doesn't that make any character using spoofed Freelancer IFF basically unbounty-able? Big can of worms lol.

---

Information ≛ Recruitment ≛ After Action Reports ≛ Feedback

---

"Honour. Courage. Commitment."
Task Force Akhetaten - Information

Tenshi

Discord: kagetenshi

Liberty Navy 46th Fleet

[Darius]

I have always been of the opinion that we need to have a database pinned somewhere that contains the most important canon treaties, with the possibility of adding, right under, player government treaties. It is much better than weaseling your way through 5 subforums and hoping that there's a list of active treaties, or, as has been rightfully pointed out, hoping that everyone knows (or remembers) agreements mentioned in vanilla.

[Toaster]

I was of the impression that IDs were already to be treated exclusively oorp ever since this change, seeing as that is the obvious, logical conclusion to come to. If IFFs are now properly locked to faction IDs (with the exception of generic and Wild/intel IDs), then the ID itself is no longer needed inrp to identify a character's affiliation. Likewise, generic/Wild/intel IDs' ability to spoof their IFF only makes sense if they can't immediately be exposed by scanning their ID. So IDs are essentially required to be oorp only.

This could and should be clarified in the server rules with a simple one-liner.

Additionally, IDs could be renamed to something else, since they no longer serve as a means to identify a character. The IFF does this now. Perhaps "ruleset" or "permissions" could be used instead.

---

Olivia Sable

[Tenshi]

I was of the impression that IDs were already to be treated exclusively oorp ever since this change, seeing as that is the obvious, logical conclusion to come to. If IFFs are now properly locked to faction IDs (with the exception of generic and Wild/intel IDs), then the ID itself is no longer needed inrp to identify a character's affiliation. Likewise, generic/Wild/intel IDs' ability to spoof their IFF only makes sense if they can't immediately be exposed by scanning their ID. So IDs are essentially required to be oorp only.

This could and should be clarified in the server rules with a simple one-liner.

Additionally, IDs could be renamed to something else, since they no longer serve as a means to identify a character. The IFF does this now. Perhaps "ruleset" or "permissions" could be used instead.

I'd have replied here way sooner if I wasn't in the process of writing a post already, but damn I can't stress how much this post summarizes my thoughts.

Toaster is just correct in everything he's writing, and I think it's about time the server rules get updated on the matter, the bounty boards and the /bs command get updated respectively, and maybe even IDs get renamed to something less misleading - especially for newer players. Think about it, the term "IFF" has the word "ID = Identification" literally built into it.

---

Information ≛ Recruitment ≛ After Action Reports ≛ Feedback

---

"Honour. Courage. Commitment."
Task Force Akhetaten - Information

Tenshi

Discord: kagetenshi

Liberty Navy 46th Fleet

[Haste]

We're currently planning a big overhaul to how IDs work, particularly focused on accessibility for new players, and it involves making it so IFFs are all you care about. As in, what you can do with/to a player depends on their IFF, not their ID. However, some very involved FLHook work is being done that'll take quite a bit of time before we can focus on this. As it is, the rules are ID-based, and they have been for a very long time. Some random announcement new players (and veterans!) can easily miss that isn't integrated into the rules doesn't change the status quo.

I'd still personally treat players who are IFF spoofing according to their IFF, but nothing stops you from engaging them based on their ID.

[Xenon]

We're currently planning a big overhaul to how IDs work, particularly focused on accessibility for new players, and it involves making it so IFFs are all you care about.

If that is going to be the new rework, and if the IFF is all that we will have to care about, so what will be the purpose of having an ID, please?

---

NEBULA INFORMATION BOT ☆ NEBULA DISCORD SERVER
XENON WEAPONS MARKET ☆ NEBULA GRAND PLAZA ☆ NEBULA TECHNOLOGIES
THE DISCOVERY POBCAST ☆ DISCOVERY SERVER RULES

[Maik]

The situation with ID is sometimes extremely controversial, so yes, it is worth relying on the IFF, except for those cases when you are dealing with a person with the same ID as you. In fact, this 'rule' should also apply to the faction tag. I don't know what kind of accessibility for newcomers we should be talking about, but if this allows them to better understand the game process, and the Administration to be less distracted by sanctions about someone violating some ZOI, then why not?

---

Discovery is a server of dreams.
And I'm a big dreamer.

[Lord Chaos]

I dont really understand the doubt but here it goes,

Making the ID an equippable item serves 3 main purposes:
1- It gives the Team and the Official Factions a tool were to display in-game the expected behaviour of the pilot carrying the ID by making use of its text..
2- it guides the player's behavior by clearly stating its role and/or intent expected from him in-game.
3- informs others scanning the ship what to expect from that player's conduct.

Therefore, and by its very nature the IDs are NOT a rolaplay item but more of a rule-template in-game for the expected behaviour of the carrier of sayd ID.

For all intents and purpuses, the player factions or groups BELONG to "X" npc faction wich determines theyr IFF, later as they become official they obtain their own custom ID still belonging to the same IFF
Then depending on the RP behind the Oficial Dom reqiest aproval, the factions MAY be somewat diferent/new from the IFF they represent
At wich time the Admin Team could choose or aprove a new IFF for the sayd ID wich gives the factions the chance to be something diferent or new, meaning canonization like it happened with Bristol.

This is my understanding of the system and honestly think its pretty clear. Maybe Higlight the importance of the ID more on Discovery would help the new players.

[R.P.Curator]

Allow me to interject with a tiny minor inchy bitsy problem:
> IF you RP people according to their IFF; instead of ID; you are going to encounter the following issue: when doing missions or encounters, If you don't play a dedicated Lawful or Unlawful faction - you play a Freelancer or QuasiLegal ID; your IFF will show something else: i.e.: Killing LR in Penn will turn your IFF to LN, even tho you're a Junker or Freelancer. Killing Xenos in Penn will turn your IFF to LR if you're a Freelancer.
Now how do you solve this? Because it is a problem; based on the discussion here so far.
Intelligence factions; IMO; should have some RP dedicated rules:
- SET Freelancer IFF & Rep WITH the exception of Other Intelligence Agencies / Military Bases / Players / NPCs - meaning only Intelligence factions / bases / players should be able to detect one another and be hostile towards each other; and this should be valid inRP - If you're a LSF ID with a FL IFF but you're next to Valraven and It starts shooting you; any LR or Xeno or Hostile Non Intelligence Players next to you can pick up on the NPC RP and shoot you If they wish to.
OR
- Playing Default Intelligence Faction - LSF, MND, KOI, GNI would get you standard IFF and REP; meaning you are not a covert agent, you're a rookie; you're walking the streets. Via SRP you can advance the REP / IFF.
- Playing an Intelligence Player Faction would get your Freelancer ID; IFF; REP + Tech Compat > But this means a Tag and more work from the dev team or an automated system which detects on tag creation the line "Intelligence Agency" and automatically sets the ID; IFF; REP.